COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

Senate Official Hansard No. 8, 2005 TUESDAY, 14 JUNE 2005

FORTY-FIRST PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION—THIRD PERIOD

BY AUTHORITY OF THE SENATE

INTERNET The Journals for the Senate are available at http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/work/journals/index.htm

Proof and Official Hansards for the House of Representatives, the Senate and committee hearings are available at http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard

For searching purposes use http://parlinfoweb.aph.gov.au

SITTING DAYS—2005 Month Date February 8, 9, 10 March 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17 May 10, 11, 12 June 14, 15, 16, 20, 21, 22, 23 August 9, 10, 11, 15, 16, 17, 18 September 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15 October 4, 5, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13 November 7, 8, 9, 10, 28, 29, 30 December 1, 5, 6, 7, 8

RADIO BROADCASTS Broadcasts of proceedings of the Parliament can be heard on the following Parliamentary and News Network radio stations, in the areas identified.

CANBERRA 1440 AM SYDNEY 630 AM NEWCASTLE 1458 AM GOSFORD 98.1 FM BRISBANE 936 AM GOLD COAST 95.7 FM MELBOURNE 1026 AM ADELAIDE 972 AM PERTH 585 AM HOBART 747 AM NORTHERN TASMANIA 92.5 FM DARWIN 102.5 FM

FORTY-FIRST PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION—THIRD PERIOD

Governor-General

His Excellency Major-General Michael Jeffery, Companion in the Order of Australia, Com- mander of the Royal Victorian Order, Military Cross

Senate Officeholders

President—Senator the Hon. Paul Henry Calvert Deputy President and Chairman of Committees—Senator John Joseph Hogg Temporary Chairmen of Committees—Senators the Hon. Nick Bolkus, George Henry Bran- dis, Hedley Grant Pearson Chapman, John Clifford Cherry, Patricia Margaret Crossin, Alan Baird Ferguson, Stephen Patrick Hutchins, Linda Jean Kirk, Susan Christine Knowles, Philip Ross Lightfoot, John Alexander Lindsay (Sandy) Macdonald, Gavin Mark Marshall, Claire Mary Moore and John Odin Wentworth Watson Leader of the Government in the Senate—Senator the Hon. Robert Murray Hill Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate—Senator the Hon. Nicholas Hugh Minchin Leader of the Opposition in the Senate—Senator Christopher Vaughan Evans Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate—Senator Stephen Michael Conroy Manager of Government Business in the Senate—Senator the Hon. Christopher Mar- tin Ellison Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate—Senator Joseph William Ludwig

Senate Party Leaders and Whips

Leader of the Liberal Party of Australia—Senator the Hon. Robert Murray Hill Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party of Australia—Senator the Hon. Nicholas Hugh Minchin Leader of the National Party of Australia—Senator the Hon. Ronald Leslie Doyle Boswell Deputy Leader of the National Party of Australia—Senator John Alexander Lindsay (Sandy) Macdonald Leader of the Australian Labor Party—Senator Christopher Vaughan Evans Deputy Leader of the Australian Labor Party—Senator Stephen Michael Conroy Leader of the Australian Democrats—Senator Lynette Fay Allison Liberal Party of Australia Whips—Senators Jeannie Margaret Ferris and Alan Eggleston National Party of Australia Whip—Senator Julian John James McGauran Opposition Whips—Senators George Campbell and Geoffrey Frederick Buckland Australian Democrats Whip—Senator Andrew John Julian Bartlett

Printed by authority of the Senate i

Members of the Senate State or Terri- Senator tory Term expires Party Abetz, Hon. Eric Tas 30.6.2005 LP Allison, Lynette Fay Vic 30.6.2008 AD Barnett, Guy (5) Tas 30.6.2005 LP Bartlett, Andrew John Julian Qld 30.6.2008 AD Bishop, Thomas Mark WA 30.6.2008 ALP Bolkus, Hon. Nick SA 30.6.2005 ALP Boswell, Hon. Ronald Leslie Doyle Qld 30.6.2008 NATS Brandis, George Henry (2) Qld 30.6.2005 LP Brown, Robert James Tas 30.6.2008 AG Buckland, Geoffrey Frederick (4) SA 30.6.2005 ALP Calvert, Hon. Paul Henry Tas 30.6.2008 LP Campbell, George NSW 30.6.2008 ALP Campbell, Hon. Ian Gordon WA 30.6.2005 LP Carr, Kim John Vic 30.6.2005 ALP Chapman, Hedley Grant Pearson SA 30.6.2008 LP Cherry, John Clifford (3) Qld 30.6.2005 AD Colbeck, Richard Mansell Tas 30.6.2008 LP Collins, Jacinta Mary Ann Vic 30.6.2005 ALP Conroy, Stephen Michael Vic 30.6.2005 ALP Cook, Hon. Peter Francis Salmon WA 30.6.2005 ALP Coonan, Hon. Helen Lloyd NSW 30.6.2008 LP Crossin, Patricia Margaret (1) NT ALP Denman, Kay Janet Tas 30.6.2005 ALP Eggleston, Alan WA 30.6.2008 LP Ellison, Hon. Christopher Martin WA 30.6.2005 LP Evans, Christopher Vaughan WA 30.6.2005 ALP Faulkner, Hon. John Philip NSW 30.6.2005 ALP Ferguson, Alan Baird SA 30.6.2005 LP Ferris, Jeannie Margaret SA 30.6.2008 LP Fierravanti-Wells, Concetta Anna(8) NSW 30.6.2005 LP Fifield, Mitchell Peter(7) Vic 30.6.2008 LP Forshaw, Michael George NSW 30.6.2005 ALP Greig, Brian Andrew WA 30.6.2005 AD Harradine, Brian Tas 30.6.2005 Ind Harris, Leonard William QLD 30.6.2005 PHON Heffernan, Hon. William Daniel NSW 30.6.2005 LP Hill, Hon. Robert Murray SA 30.6.2008 LP Hogg, John Joseph QLD 30.6.2008 ALP Humphries, Gary John Joseph (1) ACT LP Hutchins, Stephen Patrick NSW 30.6.2005 ALP Johnston, David Albert Lloyd WA 30.6.2008 LP Kemp, Hon. Charles Roderick VIC 30.6.2008 LP Kirk, Linda Jean SA 30.6.2008 ALP Knowles, Susan Christine WA 30.6.2005 LP Lees, Meg Heather SA 30.6.2005 APA Lightfoot, Philip Ross WA 30.6.2008 LP Ludwig, Joseph William QLD 30.6.2005 ALP Lundy, Kate Alexandra (1) ACT ALP ii

State or Terri- Senator tory Term expires Party Macdonald, Hon. Ian Douglas QLD 30.6.2008 LP Macdonald, John Alexander Lindsay (Sandy) NSW 30.6.2008 NATS McGauran, Julian John James VIC 30.6.2005 NATS Mackay, Susan Mary TAS 30.6.2008 ALP McLucas, Jan Elizabeth QLD 30.6.2005 ALP Marshall, Gavin Mark VIC 30.6.2008 ALP Mason, Brett John QLD 30.6.2005 LP Minchin, Hon. Nicholas Hugh SA 30.6.2005 LP Moore, Claire Mary QLD 30.6.2008 ALP Murphy, Shayne Michael TAS 30.6.2005 Ind Murray, Andrew James Marshall WA 30.6.2008 AD Nettle, Kerry Michelle NSW 30.6.2008 AG O’Brien, Kerry Williams Kelso TAS 30.6.2005 ALP Patterson, Hon. Kay Christine Lesley VIC 30.6.2008 LP Payne, Marise Ann NSW 30.6.2008 LP Ray, Hon. Robert Francis VIC 30.6.2008 ALP Ridgeway, Aden Derek NSW 30.6.2005 AD Santoro, Santo (6) QLD 30.6.2008 LP Scullion, Nigel Gregory (1) NT CLP Sherry, Hon. Nicholas John TAS 30.6.2008 ALP Stephens, Ursula Mary NSW 30.6.2008 ALP Stott Despoja, Natasha Jessica SA 30.6.2008 AD Tchen, Tsebin VIC 30.6.2005 LP Troeth, Hon. Judith Mary VIC 30.6.2005 LP Vanstone, Hon. Amanda Eloise SA 30.6.2005 LP Watson, John Odin Wentworth TAS 30.6.2008 LP Webber, Ruth Stephanie WA 30.6.2008 ALP Wong, Penelope Ying Yen SA 30.6.2008 ALP (1) Term expires at close of day next preceding the polling day for the general election of members of the House of Representatives. (2) Chosen by the Parliament of Queensland to fill a casual vacancy vice Hon. Warwick Raymond Parer, resigned. (3) Chosen by the Parliament of Queensland to fill a casual vacancy vice John Woodley, resigned. (4) Chosen by the Parliament of South Australia to fill a casual vacancy vice John Andrew Quirke, resigned. (5) Appointed by the Governor of Tasmania to fill a casual vacancy vice Hon. Brian Francis Gibson AM, resigned. (6) Chosen by the Parliament of Queensland to fill a casual vacancy vice Hon. John Joseph Herron, resigned. (7) Chosen by the Parliament of Victoria to fill a casual vacancy vice Hon. Richard Kenneth Robert Alston, resigned. (8) Chosen by the Parliament of New South Wales to fill a casual vacancy vice John Tierney, resigned.

PARTY ABBREVIATIONS AD—Australian Democrats; AG—Australian Greens; ALP—Australian Labor Party; APA—Australian Progressive Alliance; CLP—Country Labor Party; Ind—Independent; LP—Liberal Party of Australia; NATS—The Nationals; PHON—Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Heads of Parliamentary Departments Clerk of the Senate—H Evans Clerk of the House of Representatives—I C Harris Secretary, Department of Parliamentary Services—H R Penfold QC

iii

HOWARD MINISTRY

Prime Minister The Hon. John Winston Howard MP Minister for Transport and Regional Services and The Hon. John Duncan Anderson MP Deputy Prime Minister Treasurer The Hon. Peter Howard Costello MP Minister for Trade The Hon. Mark Anthony James Vaile MP Minister for Defence and Leader of the Govern- Senator the Hon. Robert Murray Hill ment in the Senate Minister for Foreign Affairs The Hon. Alexander John Gosse Downer MP Minister for Health and Ageing and Leader of the The Hon. Anthony John Abbott MP House Attorney-General The Hon. Philip Maxwell Ruddock MP Minister for Finance and Administration, Deputy Senator the Hon. Nicholas Hugh Minchin Leader of the Government in the Senate and Vice-President of the Executive Council Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry The Hon. Warren Errol Truss MP Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Senator the Hon. Amanda Eloise Vanstone Indigenous Affairs and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Indigenous Affairs Minister for Education, Science and Training The Hon. Dr Brendan John Nelson MP Minister for Family and Community Services and Senator the Hon. Kay Christine Lesley Patterson Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Women’s Issues Minister for Industry, Tourism and Resources The Hon. Ian Elgin Macfarlane MP Minister for Employment and Workplace Rela- The Hon. Kevin James Andrews MP tions and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service Minister for Communications, Information Tech- Senator the Hon. Helen Lloyd Coonan nology and the Arts Minister for the Environment and Heritage Senator the Hon. Ian Gordon Campbell

(The above ministers constitute the cabinet)

iv

HOWARD MINISTRY—continued

Minister for Justice and Customs and Manager of Senator the Hon. Christopher Martin Ellison Government Busines in the Senate Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation Senator the Hon. Ian Douglas Macdonald Minister for the Arts and Sport Senator the Hon. Charles Roderick Kemp Minister for Human Services The Hon. Joseph Benedict Hockey MP Minister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs The Hon. Peter John McGauran MP and Deputy Leader of the House Minister for Revenue and Assistant Treasurer The Hon. Malcolm Thomas Brough MP Special Minister of State Senator the Hon. Eric Abetz Minister for Vocational and Technical Education The Hon. Gary Douglas Hardgrave MP and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister Minister for Ageing The Hon. Julie Isabel Bishop MP Minister for Small Business and Tourism The Hon. Frances Esther Bailey MP Minister for Local Government, Territories and The Hon. James Eric Lloyd MP Roads Minister for Veterans’ Affairs and Minister As- The Hon. De-Anne Margaret Kelly MP sisting the Minister for Defence Minister for Workforce Participation The Hon. Peter Craig Dutton MP Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Fi- The Hon. Dr Sharman Nancy Stone MP nance and Administration Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Indus- The Hon. Warren George Entsch MP try, Tourism and Resources Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health The Hon. Christopher Maurice Pyne MP and Ageing Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for De- The Hon. Teresa Gambaro MP fence Parliamentary Secretary (Foreign Affairs and The Hon. Bruce Fredrick Billson MP Trade) Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister The Hon. Gary Roy Nairn MP Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer The Hon. Christopher John Pearce MP Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Trans- The Hon. John Kenneth Cobb MP port and Regional Services Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the The Hon. Gregory Andrew Hunt MP Environment and Heritage Parliamentary Secretary (Children and Youth Af- The Hon. Sussan Penelope Ley MP fairs) Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Educa- The Hon. Patrick Francis Farmer MP tion, Science and Training Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Agri- Senator the Hon. Richard Mansell Colbeck culture, Fisheries and Forestry

v

SHADOW MINISTRY

Leader of the Opposition The Hon. Kim Christian Beazley MP Deputy Leader of the Opposition and Shadow Jennifer Louise Macklin MP Minister for Education, Training, Science and Research Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and Senator Christopher Vaughan Evans Shadow Minister for Social Security Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and Senator Stephen Michael Conroy Shadow Minister for Communications and In- formation Technology Shadow Minister for Health and Manager of Op- Julia Eileen Gillard MP position Business in the House Shadow Treasurer Wayne Maxwell Swan MP Shadow Minister for Industry, Infrastructure and Stephen Francis Smith MP Industrial Relations Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs and Interna- Kevin Michael Rudd MP tional Security Shadow Minister for Defence and Homeland Se- Robert Bruce McClelland MP curity Shadow Minister for Trade The Hon. Simon Findlay Crean MP Shadow Minister for Primary Industries, Re- Martin John Ferguson MP sources and Tourism Shadow Minister for Environment and Heritage Anthony Norman Albanese MP and Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House Shadow Minister for Public Administration and Senator Kim John Carr Open Government, Shadow Minister for Indige- nous Affairs and Reconciliation and Shadow Minister for the Arts Shadow Minister for Regional Development and Kelvin John Thomson MP Roads and Shadow Minister for Housing and Urban Development Shadow Minister for Finance and Superannuation Senator the Hon. Nicholas John Sherry Shadow Minister for Work, Family and Commu- Tanya Joan Plibersek MP nity, Shadow Minister for Youth and Early Childhood Education and Shadow Minister As- sisting the Leader on the Status of Women Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Senator Penelope Ying Yen Wong Participation and Shadow Minister for Corporate Governance and Responsibility

(The above are shadow cabinet ministers)

vi

SHADOW MINISTRY—continued Shadow Minister for Immigration Laurence Donald Thomas Ferguson MP Shadow Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries Gavan Michael O’Connor MP Shadow Assistant Treasurer, Shadow Minister for Joel Andrew Fitzgibbon MP Revenue and Shadow Minister for Banking and Financial Services Shadow Attorney-General Nicola Louise Roxon MP Shadow Minister for Regional Services, Local Senator Kerry Williams Kelso O’Brien Government and Territories Shadow Minister for Manufacturing and Shadow Senator Kate Alexandra Lundy Minister for Consumer Affairs Shadow Minister for Defence Planning, Procure- The Hon. Archibald Ronald Bevis MP ment and Personnel and Shadow Minister As- sisting the Shadow Minister for Industrial Rela- tions Shadow Minister for Sport and Recreation Alan Peter Griffin MP Shadow Minister for Veterans’ Affairs Senator Thomas Mark Bishop Shadow Minister for Small Business Tony Burke MP Shadow Minister for Ageing, Disabilities and Senator Jan Elizabeth McLucas Carers Shadow Minister for Justice and Customs, Senator Joseph William Ludwig Shadow Minister for Citizenship and Multicul- tural Affairs and Manager of Opposition Busi- ness in the Senate Shadow Minister for Pacific Islands Robert Charles Grant Sercombe MP Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of John Paul Murphy MP the Opposition Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence The Hon. Graham John Edwards MP Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Education Kirsten Fiona Livermore MP Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Environment Jennie George MP and Heritage Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Infrastructure Bernard Fernando Ripoll MP Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Health Ann Kathleen Corcoran MP Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Catherine Fiona King MP Development (House) Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Senator Ursula Mary Stephens Development (Senate) Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern The Hon. Warren Edward Snowdon MP Australia and Indigenous Affairs

vii CONTENTS

TUESDAY, 14 JUNE

Chamber Representation of New South Wales...... 1 Parliament House: Security ...... 1 Tax Laws Amendment (Personal Income Tax Reduction) Bill 2005— First Reading ...... 1 Second Reading...... 1 Questions Without Notice— Asylum Seekers...... 22 Whaling ...... 23 Asylum Seekers...... 24 Immigration...... 25 Immigration...... 26 Asylum Seekers...... 27 Ms Vivian Alvarez...... 28 Asylum Seekers...... 29 Immigration...... 30 Taxation...... 31 Immigration...... 32 Telstra ...... 33 Telstra ...... 35 Forestry...... 36 Questions Without Notice: Take Note of Answers— Immigration...... 37 Petitions— Child Abuse...... 44 Live Animal Exports ...... 44 Defence: Involvement in Overseas Conflict Legislation...... 44 Asylum Seekers...... 45 Notices— Presentation ...... 45 Committees— Employment, Workplace Relations and Education References Committee—Extension of Time ...... 60 Business— Rearrangement...... 60 Committees— Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee—Extension of Time...... 60 Economics Legislation Committee—Meeting ...... 61 Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee—Meeting ...... 61 Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee—Meeting...... 61 Leave of Absence...... 61 Notices— Postponement ...... 61 Melbourne University Student Union...... 61 Committees— Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee—Reference ...... 62 Tasmanian Pulp Mill...... 62

CONTENTS—continued

Documents— Tabling...... 62 Tabling...... 63 Budget— Portfolio Budget Statements—Additional Information...... 64 Committees— Community Affairs References Committee—Additional Information...... 64 Budget— Consideration by Legislation Committees—Additional Information ...... 64 Committees— Public Works Committee—Reports ...... 64 ASIO, ASIS and DSD Committee—Reports ...... 74 Membership...... 75 Asbestos-related Claims (Management of Commonwealth Liabilities) (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2005, Asbestos-related Claims (Management of Commonwealth Liabilities) Bill 2005, Import Processing Charges Amendment Bill 2005, Customs Legislation Amendment (Import Processing Charges) Bill 2005, Superannuation Bill 2005, Superannuation (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2005, Superannuation Laws Amendment (Abolition of Surcharge) Bill 2005, Tax Laws Amendment (Medicare Levy and Medicare Levy Surcharge) Bill 2005, Aged Care Amendment (Extra Service) Bill 2005, Civil Aviation Amendment Bill 2005, Crimes Amendment Bill 2005, Health Legislation Amendment (Australian Community Pharmacy Authority) Bill 2005, Higher Education Legislation Amendment (2005 Measures No. 2) Bill 2005, Indigenous Education (Targeted Assistance) Amendment Bill 2005, Maritime Transport Security Amendment Bill 2005, Payment Systems (Regulation) Amendment Bill 2005, Primary Industries (Excise) Levies Amendment (Rice) Bill 2005, Sex Discrimination Amendment (Teaching Profession) Bill 2004, Superannuation Legislation Amendment (Choice of Superannuation Funds) Bill 2005 and Tax Laws Amendment (2005 Measures No. 3) Bill 2005— First Reading ...... 76 Second Reading...... 76 Committees— Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee: Joint—Membership...... 92 Bankruptcy and Family Law Legislation Amendment Bill 2005, New International Tax Arrangements (Managed Funds and Other Measures) Bill 2005, Aged Care Amendment (Transition Care and Assets Testing) Bill 2005, Tax Laws Amendment (2004 Measures No. 6) Bill 2005, Telecommunications (Consumer Protection and Service Standards) Amendment (National Relay Service) Bill 2005, Medical Indemnity Legislation Amendment Bill 2005, Defence Amendment Bill 2005, National Security Information (Criminal Proceedings) Amendment (Application) Bill 2005, Navigation Amendment Bill 2005,

CONTENTS—continued

Family and Community Services and Veterans’ Affairs Legislation Amendment (Further 2004 Election Commitments and Other Measures) Bill 2005, Farm Household Support Amendment Bill 2005, National Health Amendment (Prostheses) Bill 2005, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission Amendment Bill 2005, Appropriation (Tsunami Financial Assistance) Bill 2004-2005, Appropriation (Tsunami Financial Assistance and Australia-Indonesia Partnership) Bill 2004-2005, Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2004-2005, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2004-2005, Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2004-2005, Administrative Appeals Tribunal Amendment Bill 2005, Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2005, Australian Sports Commission Amendment Bill 2004 [2005], Tax Laws Amendment (2004 Measures No. 7) Bill 2005, Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals Legislation Amendment (Levy and Fees) Bill 2005, Broadcasting Services Amendment (Anti-Siphoning) Bill 2005, Australian Communications and Media Authority Bill 2005, Australian Communications and Media Authority (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2005, Telecommunications (Carrier Licence Charges) Amendment Bill 2005, Telecommunications (Numbering Charges) Amendment Bill 2005, Television Licence Fees Amendment Bill 2005, Datacasting Charge (Imposition) Amendment Bill 2005, Radiocommunications (Receiver Licence Tax) Amendment Bill 2005, Radiocommunications (Spectrum Licence Tax) Amendment Bill 2005, Radiocommunications (Transmitter Licence Tax) Amendment Bill 2005, Radio Licence Fees Amendment Bill 2005. Australian Institute of Marine Science Amendment Bill 2005, Social Security Legislation Amendment (One-off Payments for Carers) Bill 2005 and Higher Education Legislation Amendment (2005 Measures No. 1) Bill 2005— Assent ...... 93 Southern Bluefin Tuna Fisheries Management Plan...... 93 Tax Laws Amendment (Personal Income Tax Reduction) Bill 2005— Second Reading...... 97 First Speech ...... 101 Tax Laws Amendment (Personal Income Tax Reduction) Bill 2005— Second Reading...... 105 Notices— Presentation ...... 110 Tax Laws Amendment (Personal Income Tax Reduction) Bill 2005— Second Reading...... 110 In Committee...... 119 Documents— Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission ...... 122 Consideration...... 123 Adjournment— Environment ...... 123 Tasmania: Industrial Relations ...... 126

CONTENTS—continued

Australian Constitution...... 128 Zonta Club...... 130 Air Crash Anniversary...... 132 Water Smart Australia...... 132 Adjournment...... 136 Documents— Tabling...... 138 Tabling...... 138 Departmental and Agency Contracts ...... 147 Questions on Notice Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry: Advertising Campaign—(Question No. 131) ...... 148 Environment and Heritage: Advertising Campaign—(Question No. 138)...... 149 Human Cloning—(Question No. 174)...... 150 Roads to Recovery Program Funding—(Question No. 185)...... 150 Ansett Australia: Employee Entitlements—(Question No. 262)...... 151 Southern Supporter—(Question No. 300) ...... 152 Mr Peter Qasim—(Question No. 310)...... 153 Transport Services—(Question No. 319) ...... 153 Captioning Services—(Question No. 340)...... 154 Aviation Fuel—(Question No. 350) ...... 154 Civil Aviation Safety Authority—(Question No. 351) ...... 155 Civil Aviation Safety Authority—(Question No. 355) ...... 156 Therapeutic Goods Administration—(Question No. 374)...... 157 National Literacy and Numeracy Standards—(Question No. 380) ...... 158 Tutorial Voucher Initiative—(Question No. 384)...... 159 Hysterectomies—(Question No. 386) ...... 160 Australian Broadcasting Corporation—(Question No. 388) ...... 161 Visas—(Question No. 389) ...... 162 Protection Visa Applicants—(Question No. 391)...... 163 Goods and Services—(Question Nos 393 to 423)...... 165 Asylum Seekers—(Question No. 424) ...... 165 Migration Agent or Exempted Agent Form—(Question No. 425) ...... 166 Migration Agent or Exempted Agent Form—(Question No. 426) ...... 167 Migration Agent or Exempted Agent Form—(Question No. 427) ...... 168 Migration Agent or Exempted Agent Form—(Question No. 428) ...... 168 SIEV X—(Question No. 431)...... 168 Beryllium—(Question No. 446)...... 169 Iraq—(Question No. 458)...... 169 Infrastructure Borrowings—(Question No. 460)...... 170 Defence: Australian Remains—(Question No. 464) ...... 172 Tasmania: Proposed Pulp Mill—(Question No. 470)...... 174 Tasmania: Proposed Pulp Mill—(Question No. 474)...... 174 Universities—(Question No. 478)...... 175 Aircraft Weapons—(Question No. 479) ...... 184 Aircraft Weapons—(Question No. 480) ...... 184 Mr David Hicks—(Question No. 486) ...... 185 Caesium 137—(Question No. 489) ...... 186 Port Phillip Bay—(Question No. 490) ...... 186 Spanish Latin American Welfare Centre—(Question No. 491)...... 187 Recherche Bay—(Question No. 492)...... 188

CONTENTS—continued

Blood Banks—(Question No. 493) ...... 189 Forensic Computing and Computer Investigations Workshop—(Question No. 505) ...... 191 Child Sex Tourism Laws—(Question No. 507)...... 192 Courts—(Question No. 508 amended) ...... 193 Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands—(Question No. 509) ...... 196 Passport Readers—(Question No. 513)...... 197 Identity Fraud—(Question No. 514) ...... 198 Rewards for Information—(Question No. 515) ...... 199 Transport and Regional Services: Fraud—(Question No. 516)...... 200 Defence: Fraud—(Question No. 518) ...... 200 Foreign Affairs and Trade: Fraud—(Question No. 519)...... 200 Education, Science and Training: Fraud—(Question No. 523)...... 201 Family and Community Services: Fraud—(Question No. 524) ...... 201 Employment and Workplace Relations: Fraud—(Question No. 526) ...... 202 National Breeding and Development Centre—(Question No. 528)...... 203 Transport and Regional Services: Overseas Travel—(Question No. 529) ...... 203 Health and Ageing: Overseas Travel—(Question No. 530) ...... 204 Finance and Administration: Overseas Travel—(Question No. 531)...... 204 Education, Science and Training: Overseas Travel—(Question No. 533) ...... 205 Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme—(Question No. 537)...... 205 Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme—(Question No. 538)...... 207 Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme—(Question No. 539)...... 207 Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme—(Question No. 540)...... 208 Taxation—(Question No. 541) ...... 208 Education, Science and Training: Payment of Accounts—(Question No. 544) ...... 209 South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone—(Question No. 545)...... 210 National Gallery of Australia—(Question No. 547)...... 210 Iraq—(Question No. 548)...... 211 Iraq—(Question No. 549)...... 212 Military Flyovers—(Question No. 553) ...... 213 C-130J Aircraft—(Question No. 558) ...... 214 Red-Tailed Black Cockatoo Habitat—(Question No. 559) ...... 214 Political Activity—(Question No. 560)...... 215 Southern Supporter—(Question No. 565 Amended)...... 216 Non-Proliferation Treaty—(Question No. 578)...... 216 Commonwealth State Disability Agreement—(Question No. 580)...... 217 Treasurer: Responsibilities—(Question No. 774) ...... 217 Minister for Revenue and Assistant Treasurer: Responsibilities—(Question No. 794) ...235 Environment Groups—(Question No. 865)...... 249 Indonesian Military—(Question No. 902)...... 249 Fiji—(Question No. 903)...... 250

Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 1

Tuesday, 14 June 2005 these sorts of items realise that the people ————— they put most at risk are those who collect The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. and distribute our mail at Parliament House, Paul Calvert) took the chair at 12.30 pm and not the addressee. The Speaker and I cannot read prayers. condemn this sort of behaviour strongly enough. REPRESENTATION OF NEW SOUTH WALES TAX LAWS AMENDMENT (PERSONAL INCOME TAX REDUCTION) BILL 2005 The PRESIDENT—I table the original certificate, received through His Excellency First Reading the Governor-General, from the Lieutenant Bill received from the House of Represen- Governor of New South Wales, of the choice tatives. by the houses of parliament of New South Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— Wales of Senator Fierravanti-Wells to fill the Minister for Justice and Customs) (12.33 vacancy caused by the resignation of Senator pm)—I move: Tierney. That this bill may proceed without formalities PARLIAMENT HOUSE: SECURITY and be now read a first time. The PRESIDENT (12.31 pm)—Senators Question agreed to. may be aware that over the last two weeks Bill read a first time. Parliament House has experienced three in- Second Reading cidents where white powder was found in letters delivered to the building. In all in- Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— stances, the substances were found to be Minister for Justice and Customs) (12.33 non-hazardous. Unfortunately, parliamentary pm)—I move: security staff detected a further suspect pack- That this bill be now read a second time. age in the loading dock this morning. As a I seek leave to have the second reading result of the earlier incidents, mail screening speech incorporated in Hansard. procedures have been enhanced, with effect Leave granted. from this morning, by introducing a second level of screening to reduce the risk of letters The speech read as follows— containing hazardous substances entering the TAX LAWS AMENDMENT (PERSONAL building. INCOME TAX REDUCTION) BILL 2005 The new screening procedures may delay The measures contained in this bill will cut per- sonal income tax for all Australian taxpayers. the delivery of mail to senators’ suites. How- ever, the Speaker and I consider this action is The tax reductions amount to $21.7 billion over necessary while we are experiencing an in- the next four years. This is in addition to the $14.7 billion in tax cuts provided in last year’s crease in these incidents. Senators and their Budget. staff should also be looking out for any sus- From 1 July 2005, the 17 per cent marginal tax pect mail and, if they are in doubt, I cannot rate will be cut to 15 per cent. emphasise too strongly that they should not open any suspect envelope. Instead, they The 42 per cent threshold will increase to $63,000 and from 1 July 2006, will increase again to should contact Parliament House security on $70,000. telephone extension 7117, where they will be given instructions on what action they need to take. I hope that the people who send

CHAMBER 2 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

From 1 July 2005, the 47 per cent threshold will Reduction) Bill 2005 I start by making it increase to $95,000 and from 1 July 2006 will clear that the Senate has both a right and a increase again to $125,000. responsibility to debate and review legisla- The reduction in the 17 per cent rate to 15 per tion—this legislation and all other legislation cent means that taxpayers who are eligible for the that comes before the parliament. That is full Low Income Tax Offset will not pay tax until what Australians expect from this chamber. their income exceeds $7,567, up from $7,382 That is why they elected us. As the alterna- currently. tive government, the Labor Party also have Senior Australians will also benefit. From 1 July obligations to the Australian people. It is our 2005, senior Australians who receive the Senior responsibility to provide an alternative view Australians Tax Offset can earn more without paying tax. Single senior Australians will now of legislation, to speak out when we think pay no tax on their annual income up to $21,968 things are wrong and to fight for those peo- and no tax on equal incomes up to a joint $36,494 ple whose interests we represent. for a couple. The Medicare levy threshold for In the case of this tax legislation, Labor senior Australians will be increased to ensure that have a very different alternative view. We they do not pay the Medicare levy until they be- believe the government’s proposal is grossly gin to incur an income tax liability. unfair, and we have been making that case in The personal income tax cuts will assist low in- the strongest possible terms since the budget come earners, boost disposable incomes and im- was delivered. These changes are particularly prove incentives for all Australian taxpayers to unfair in the context of the draconian welfare participate in the workforce, to invest and to save. This will ensure that over 80 per cent of taxpayers cuts that form the centrepiece of the budget. will face a top marginal tax rate of 30 per cent or To fail to speak out against these tax and less. welfare changes would be a dereliction of These personal income tax cuts will further im- our duty to the electorate. But in this case prove the structure of Australia’s tax system and Labor are not just arguing against the gov- increase our international competitiveness. Our ernment’s tax changes; we are presenting a strong economy, lifestyle advantages and changes comprehensive alternative. We have pre- to the top two thresholds will provide incentives sented and are arguing for a different pack- to work in Australia. Taxpayers will not reach the age, a package which offers broader tax re- highest marginal tax rate until they earn around lief for working Australians and a much three times average weekly earnings, with the top fairer package than that which the govern- marginal rate applying to only 3 per cent of tax- ment is offering. Even the government has payers from 2006-07. failed to tackle us on that issue. But this is If the threshold for the top marginal rate had been our role as the opposition: to critique the indexed to inflation since 1996, on 1 July 2006 it would have stood below $64,000. Under the government’s legislation, to present alterna- measures contained in this bill it will stand at tive views and to put forward alternative $125,000. strategies. Labor will not shirk that responsi- Full details of the measures in this bill are con- bility, and that is what we take up today. tained in the explanatory memorandum. The Treasurer, for his part, would have us I commend the bill. not play that role, not carry out our duty as Senator CHRIS EVANS (Western Aus- the opposition. He would have us move aside tralia—Leader of the Opposition in the Sen- and quietly allow the passage of this unfair ate) (12.33 pm)—In speaking to the Tax legislation. His position, as with the thinking Laws Amendment (Personal Income Tax of many, is based on the fact that as of 1 July the coalition will have a majority in the Sen-

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 3 ate and will probably be free to pass any leg- trayal of the trust placed in us by so many islation it thinks fit. Labor acknowledge that Australian people. political reality. We respect the verdict of the The choices made in the budget reflect the Australian people handed down in October values and priorities of the Howard govern- last year. However, that does not mean we ment. This budget comes at a time of ex- will not oppose as best we can legislation tended economic prosperity, on the back of that we think is unfair, legislation that does reforms made by the Hawke and Keating the wrong thing by Australian families. We Labor governments and highly favourable will not be running up the white flag now or economic conditions. This budget was an at any time over the next three years. opportunity for the government to make the Some commentators have supported the hard decisions to ensure our future economic Treasurer’s view that somehow Labor should prosperity in the areas of skills and infra- quietly constrain our opposition on the basis structure and to engage in constructive re- of the new Senate numbers and the political form of our tax and welfare systems. Labor reality that will confront us after July. But I believe that the hard work that needs to be think people should look very carefully at done can be done with fairness and that as a that proposition. They should consider what society we must always ensure that the bene- is required of the opposition over the next fits of prosperity are shared. As a nation we three years. Do they really want an opposi- need to make sure that the vulnerable people tion which effectively gives up and goes in our society and those who have fallen on home, one that says, ‘We won’t have the hard times are not left behind. numbers; therefore we should give up the Against that backdrop, this budget fails argument, give up the fight’? Or do they miserably. It fails to live up to the responsi- want an opposition that argues its case, pre- bilities of economic good fortune and it fails sents alternative views and policies and to invest in the skills and infrastructure that fights for what it believes in? I would argue are needed to ensure our future prosperity. that, given the power that this government This budget fails to engage in the hard re- will very soon have and given the types of forms and it fails the test of fairness. It deliv- extreme and unfair proposals that we are ers a kick in the teeth to some of the most already seeing emerge on the basis of that vulnerable people in our society: single par- new-found power, a robust, vibrant opposi- ents and the disabled. It delivers a meagre $6 tion is more important than ever. a week in tax cuts to the vast majority of The new circumstances of the Senate do working Australians, while offering 10 times not reduce our obligation to hold the gov- that amount to people on high incomes. This ernment to account for its policies and to budget is truly the work of the Howard gov- fight for a better deal for the people we rep- ernment. It shirks the hard decisions and the resent. The obligation is even stronger upon reforms that we need for Australia’s future us. The Labor opposition’s role in this par- prosperity. It delivers a huge bonus to the liament will become even more important well-off and it punishes and impoverishes than ever. That is an obligation that we ac- some of the most vulnerable in our society. It cept and will honour. So we will argue does, I am afraid, reflect the values and the against these tax and welfare changes and we priorities of the Howard government. will present what we see as better and fairer Over the last few months there has been a alternatives. To do otherwise would be a be- lot of big talk from the coalition about re-

CHAMBER 4 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 form: increasing incentives in the tax system the longer term. On current figures, a tax- and reforming our welfare infrastructure. payer on average weekly earnings of $50,000 There have been lots of leaks to newspapers per annum will, over the period from the and background briefings by ministers. But introduction of the GST to the end of the when we saw the budget it was clear that it forward estimates, get just $10 a week in tax fails to provide the incentive that is needed cuts from this government. Over the same to assist participation and economic growth, period, a taxpayer on $125,000 per annum it fails to provide real incentive to any but will get almost $120 per week—nearly 12 the best-off in our community and it fails to times as much as the average earner will get. meet the challenge of welfare reform. This These are the choices and priorities of John budget returns to Australians $24 billion in Howard and Peter Costello. They could have tax cuts and there is the abolition of the su- made different choices; they could have perannuation surcharge, but it does it in a made fairer choices. way which is grossly and shamelessly Labor has put forward an alternative fairer weighted to high-income earners. The maxi- tax proposal. This gives the government the mum tax cut made under this budget will be opportunity to offer a better deal to Austra- available only to people with a taxable in- lian families and to offer greater incentives come of $125,000 a year or more—just in our tax system. Labor’s alternative pro- 280,000 taxpayers. In fact, the top 10 per posal would implement the following cent of taxpayers will get 45 per cent of the changes from 1 January 2006: introduce a total value of these tax cuts. The other 90 per welfare to work tax bonus which, when fully cent of taxpayers share the remaining 55 per implemented, would effectively raise to cent. $10,000 the tax-free threshold for people Coalition members and senators have de- earning up to $20,000 a year; and raise the fended the unfairness of these tax cuts by threshold where the 30c income tax rate cuts claiming that higher income earners get a in to $26,400 per annum. This would deliver greater cut because they pay more tax, but a tax cut of $12 a week to low- and middle- this assertion is deceptive. Of course our tax income earners. system is based on the principle that the The following changes would also apply more you earn the more tax you pay, but this from 1 July 2006: raise the income threshold budget does not reduce the tax burden rela- where the 42c tax rate cuts in, from $63,000 tive to the difference in tax paid—in fact, it to $67,000 per annum, ensuring that 80 per undermines the principle of progressive taxa- cent of taxpayers pay a marginal tax rate of tion. A taxpayer on $125,000 a year pays 30c in the dollar or less; and raise to three times the tax of a taxpayer earning $100,000 the income threshold where the top $62,500. Under this budget, the taxpayer on tax rate cuts in, thereby improving the inter- $125,000 a year gets a cut of $65 a week— national competitiveness of our tax system. 10 times more than the $6 a week that goes This model would give a far greater tax cut to the person on $62,500 per annum. That is to Australians on low incomes. A taxpayer what fairness means to this government: the earning $25,000 per annum would gain $15 a high-income earner gets 10 times the tax cut week as opposed to $6 a week under the of the middle-income earner, even though government’s budget—that is, 2½ times the they pay three times the amount of tax. weekly gain. Taxpayers earning between The choices made in this budget are con- $35,000 and $60,000 per annum would gain sistent with the government’s approach over $12 a week, as opposed to the $6 a week

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 5 from the government, therefore doubling the promoting that as the key reform of this weekly benefit. Under Labor’s fairer pro- budget but, instead, they have pointed the posal, taxpayers earning between $70,000 finger at the 700,000 Australians on disabil- and $100,000 per annum would get a cut ity payments and spoken about increasing similar to that proposed by the government. participation and making our welfare system Those earning over $100,000 would get a tax sustainable. But what has been delivered is a cut of about $40 a week—more than $2,000 poorly thought out set of punitive changes a year. That is not as much as under the gov- that will cut the living standards of the ernment’s proposal but it is a significant cut worst-off in our society. and it provides substantial incentive. Employment participation offers people Labor’s alternative tax proposal is far not just financial independence but also so- more generous to those on low and middle cial inclusion, self-respect and the chance to incomes, while still offering a substantial tax reach their potential. Government has a role cut and recognising the hard work and aspi- in ensuring that the aspirations and potential rations of people on high incomes. Labor’s of Australians are not wasted. To properly tax alternative delivers incentives right up meet the challenge of welfare reform, there the tax scale. It respects the needs and aspira- are three key areas that need to be addressed. tions of the great majority of Australians and Firstly, we need to build capacity to ensure it demonstrates that the government could that people have the skills to be competitive have made a fairer choice—it could have in the labour market, particularly those who done the right thing by all Australian taxpay- bear the burden of long-term unemployment. ers. Secondly, we need to provide incentives to The unfairness of the Howard govern- work, so that people are financially better off ment’s tax cuts is reinforced by the other key through work, not deterred by crippling ef- plank of this budget: the massive cut in wel- fective marginal tax rates. And, thirdly, we fare. While the government has given a huge need to encourage business to take on people tax bonus to the richest Australians and who have been on welfare on the same basis thrown some scraps to low- and middle- as they would employ others. income families, it has delivered a sharp kick Addressing these three priorities would be to the most vulnerable members of our soci- a sound basis for welfare reform. However, ety. This government has always been weak the government’s plan fails to engage with on social policy, and it has made one bad any of them. Instead of providing any assis- choice after another to try and weather the tance to anyone, the centrepiece of the gov- political fallout from its policy failures. The ernment’s changes is a massive cut in pay- family tax benefit system has been a fiasco. ments. Under the new arrangements, single Despite countless tweaks to the system, parents will go onto Newstart—the parents’ 150,000 Australian families still got an FTB dole—when their youngest child turns six. debt last year. A further 300,000 families saw The tragic sixth birthday present from Peter no benefit from the $600 per child supple- Costello and John Howard for children in the mentary payment—it was simply used to pay most disadvantaged families will be a $22 off their debts. cut in weekly income. Happy birthday! Like tax, there has been a lot of big talk Somehow, the government thinks this will from the government about the need for wel- encourage parents to look for 15 hours work fare reform. The Treasurer, Mr Costello, was each week. The absurdity of this claim is

CHAMBER 6 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 exposed when you do the calculations and tering the work force and it has failed to en- find out that those single parents who already gage in any meaningful capacity building work part time will be punished the hardest. programs for single parents. What these For instance, a single parent with three chil- changes will do is expose parents to the gov- dren between six and 16 and who works 20 ernment’s harsh penalty regime and the hours a week for, say, $600 a fortnight will prospect of further cuts to family income. get $186 a fortnight less in payments after 1 The Dickensian darkness of the govern- July 2006. That is a massive cut in family ment’s plan is illustrated by the news that income of nearly $5,000 a year. Similarly, a Centrelink will now have to buy food for the single parent of two children between six and children of families who lose their payments 16 who works 15 hours a week for, say, $400 as a result of the government’s penalty re- a fortnight will see their income reduced by gime. This marks the government’s recogni- $136 a fortnight after 1 July 2006—around tion that it will move already disadvantaged $3,500 a year. families and children to a state of subsis- The parents in both of these examples are tence. These changes are a new low, even for already doing exactly what the government this government. That they should be an- wants them to do by working part time. nounced at the same time as huge tax cuts for These people are not bludgers; these are the wealthy is simply shameful. people who are working and raising kids and This budget also fails the disabled. After who are now going to be worse off as a result complaining for years about the dire situa- of this budget. So the government slashes tion of 700,000 Australians on the disability thousands of dollars from their yearly in- support pension, there is nothing in the come. These single parents may be forced to budget to address these people’s problems. leave the work force altogether, unable to John Howard and Peter Costello simply cope with the costly combination of child- found it too difficult. There is nothing to help care fees, transport fares and other expenses DSP recipients get off welfare and into work. associated with going to work. This means Instead, like single parents, new applicants that they will go back to being completely for assistance after July 2006 will have to dependent on welfare and will slip into pov- cop a massive cut in payments. People with erty, which is exactly the opposite of what disabilities who are deemed capable of part- should be happening. Moving parents onto time work will be forced onto the dole, the dole also decreases incentives to find where they will be $77 a fortnight worse off work by exposing them to effective marginal than they would be on the DSP. And, as with tax rates 20 per cent higher than they face single parents, those people with disabilities under the current parenting payment. For who are already working part time against every extra dollar that they earn, the parent the odds face the greatest punishment, on Newstart will lose 60c through the with- through the loss of thousands of dollars each drawal of payments, compared to the 40c year in payments. These changes are harsh that they lose on parenting payment. This is and mean-spirited and they do nothing to what the government represents as an incen- help people move from welfare to work. tive to work. What has become clear about the govern- The budget also fails to provide other as- ment’s welfare changes is that they were sistance to parents who are forced into work. cobbled together at the last minute. Already It provides no assurance that new child-care we have seen two major backflips as a result places will be available to single parents en- of problems exposed at Senate estimates, the

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 7 latest being that the Prime Minister had to want the government to accept that they renege on the assurance he gave to parlia- could do much better with the money and ment about the treatment of single parents provide a much better solution to the prob- looking for jobs. This deal was cobbled to- lems confronting Australia than what they gether at the last minute and the Prime Min- have come up with in this budget. In the ister did not understand it properly. It was a committee stage Labor will argue to amend classic compromise between a Prime Minis- this bill. We will argue for our fairer package ter trying to hang onto power and a Treasurer and continue to fight for a better alternative chasing his job. There are more examples of than that proposed by the Howard govern- the government’s abject failure to plan for ment. genuine welfare reform and its ducking of Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) the hard issues. There is nothing more (12.52 pm)—The purpose of the Tax Laws shameful than the fact that it did nothing to Amendment (Personal Income Tax Reduc- address the needs of those 700,000 people tion) Bill 2005 is to amend the Income Tax who are now stuck on DSP and quarantined Rates Act 1986 and the Medicare Levy Act but not assisted. 1986 to give effect to the coalition govern- Taken together, these tax changes and the ment’s tax cuts proposals spelt out in its May accompanying welfare cuts expose the pri- 2005 budget. The budget tax cuts cost $21.7 orities and values of the Howard govern- billion over four years. You would be for- ment: a bonus for the wealthy, a kick for the given for thinking that this proposal from the vulnerable and very little for middle Austra- government should have resulted in a debate lia. They not only show the government’s concerning the public interest. We did not get flawed priorities but also illustrate its failure such a debate, with too much of the media to make constructive changes in our network continuing a ridiculous obsession with inter- of social support. The government has know- preting posture rather than examining sub- ingly and willingly given thousands of dol- stance. Apart from some quality pieces from lars of tax cuts to the wealthy and taken large a few journalists and commentators—almost amounts from single-parent, working fami- invariably in the print media and not the lies. It has planned for an Australia where electronic media—the public have had a su- kids in vulnerable families will have to turn perficial and very ordinary media debate. up to Centrelink to seek food and the pay- The public are not dummies and do not de- ment of bills. The disabled will be worse off. serve to be treated so. This is a dark and shameful effort from the A public interest debate would require the Howard government, and Labor would be following questions to be asked. Are the coa- failing in our duty to the Australian people if lition’s proposed tax cuts fair? Do they ad- we did anything but to oppose it in the vance equity? Do they improve productivity strongest way possible. and efficiency? Do they integrate effectively, Labor will seek to amend this bill to make productively and fairly with the welfare sys- it fairer. We will argue for a fairer tax pack- tem? Does Australia need permanent struc- age. We will argue that the so-called welfare tural reform of its income tax system, and reforms are punishment of the disadvantaged why? What sort of permanent structural re- in our community. We will take the fight up form is needed? Should the tax-free thresh- to the government on both those issues, be- old be raised? Should we index the rates? cause the budget reflects wrong priorities Should we broaden the base? Should we and wrong choices. There is a better way. We raise the top rate? Should we change the

CHAMBER 8 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 rates themselves? If income tax reform is We will have two amendments. One opposing all only affordable in manageable stages over a tax cuts and raising the tax-free threshold to $10 number of years, what should be the priority 000 instead. The second one (if that goes down) order? Should low-income earners get atten- will split the tax cuts bill into the low income tax tion first, then middle- and high-income cuts and the high income tax cuts. We will then vote for the 17 to 15 cents low-income earners tax earners last and, if so, why? Should there be cut, and against the rest of the tax cuts. tax cuts at all, or should the budget priority be to satisfy an underspend in areas such as AAP did not think that was newsworthy— health, education, the environment and infra- surprising, really, since we Democrats share structure? the balance of power in the Senate at present. I mentioned my AAP message to a journalist Those interested in the workings of par- I know—an obedient employee of a newspa- liamentary process and our democratic sys- per that confuses democracy with duopoly tem might have expected exploration of such and bias with advocacy—and he exclaimed: issues as why parliament’s views matter, the ‘That lets Beazley off the hook!’ Actually it difference between the substantive tax bill did not, and does not, but do you think he and the consequent regulations and sched- reported my statement? Of course not, be- ules, the various voting permutations and cause he and his editor wanted to keep Mr possibilities in the Senate, and what happens Beazley on the hook. They think the public when a Senate amended bill is rejected by are interested in this strength and leadership the House. But there has not been a policy nonsense. What the public are interested in debate, has there? There have been a number are the tax cuts—whether they will get those of analytical pieces on various cases for tax on offer or whether there should be a differ- reform, but there has not been an informed ent set on offer. presentation and comparison of the views of the various political parties, academics and This debate has largely been the coalition others interested in tax, has there? and the media versus the parliament. A me- dia lynch mob has assailed the Leader of the The electorate remains largely ignorant of Opposition and his party for daring to oppose the alternative proposals and views they the government. Their crude message has should consider. And whose fault is that? been: let us have an elected dictatorship—a Whose responsibility is that? It is the respon- message that echoes too many journalists’ sibility of the media, the fourth estate—now own daily obeisance to the moguls or their mostly a big business oligopoly often rather lieutenants or the businessmen running their obviously enjoying its power to veto, sup- companies. Thank goodness for the many press and edit and to actively agitate for the other journos who do not behave or think interests of its owners. Just after the budget, like that. at 8.45 am on Thursday, 12 May, as the De- mocrats spokesperson on taxation, I sent this It has all been a question of demanding message to AAP: that the parliament step aside for the execu- tive—never mind the lessons of history and Just thought I’d send a note to you at AAP, given the known dangers of excessive forelock- the ALP’s statement that they will oppose the tax cuts package and put up an alternative. They (like tugging to the executive, never mind that the us) will need support to get any proposal up. majority of Australians did not give their primary vote to Mr Howard’s coalition, The Democrats announced their alternative pro- posal on Wednesday (see below) and will be seek- never mind that the most important power of ing ALP support. a parliament is the power to tax and spend

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 9 and it should be ever careful in doing so, Beazley and his party and, quite frankly, I never mind that democracy means that su- think somebody should stand up for them. preme power is vested in the people and is Labor do deserve criticism for not having exercised through their elected representa- a known, established and thought through tives and it is they who decide the laws. It is income tax structural reform package. They parliament that decides our laws, it is par- do deserve criticism for just cobbling to- liament that decides our taxes, not the execu- gether their answer and their attitude shortly tive and not journalists and editors who look after the budget and for not having a well forward to filling their well-paid pockets thought through approach beforehand. But with these high-income tax cuts. they do not deserve criticism for believing If it is not bad enough having many em- that the coalition tax cuts package is wrong ployees of the big business media companies and that theirs is better and for voting ac- constantly fostering a duopolistic political cordingly. That is Labor’s duty. That is La- system, if it is not bad enough having these bor’s responsibility. That is the meaning of same employees pursuing their own and their parliament and the meaning of our democ- companies’ self-interest—with never once a racy. By all means disagree with Labor. By declaration of a conflict of interest—we have all means disagree with the Democrats and them throwing overboard their sacred duty to with all the other political voices and policies the freedom of the press. That freedom is not in Australia, but at least let them be heard. the freedom to indulge your self-interest or Moving from an unusual defence of the your employer’s self-interest. It is not the Labor Party, let me now go to the Democrats freedom to fail to declare a conflict of inter- tax cuts. The relevant Democrat policy says: est. That freedom means being an organ of The Australian Democrats support a taxation sys- record, of championing free speech, of fairly tem that is broadly based, progressive, and based representing alternative points of view, of on capacity to pay. abiding by the journalists code of ethics, and We support the principle of indexing taxes in it means informing the public fully without general with income tax brackets adjusted regu- fear or favour. larly to minimise ‘bracket creep’. We have much to fear in our future if this We believe that income tax brackets should be is going to continue to be the standard of bias linked to meaningful social indicators. and groupthink we are going to be subjected We believe that the tax-free threshold should be to by so many in the media. While we can raised to the poverty line. praise the journalists who stand out from the For about three years we have been running mob, they should be the examples of the a campaign to increase the tax-free threshold best, not exceptions to the rule. Ask the vot- from $6,000 to $10,000 and progressively ers. Have they been told what points of view increasing it thereafter to the poverty line. there are on income tax reform, what the In summary, the Democrat position has issues are and what the alternative policies long been that the first budget priority is to are? Have they been told how the many satisfy underspends in areas such as health, combinations of Senate votes could produce education, the environment and infrastruc- different outcomes and how the process ture. Essential tax relief is required for low- could go? No. Most of the media’s entire income earners with very high effective mar- interest has been to lambaste Kim Beazley ginal tax rates to raise their disposable in- and his party. They have not lambasted me or come and living standards and to encourage my party, but they have lambasted Kim

CHAMBER 10 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 welfare to work through greater incentives. splitting; negative gearing; and capital gains Our position has included ending welfare for tax concessions. the wealthy by cracking down on unneces- We have suggested raising the top rate, sary tax concessions and loopholes. The and I have suggested $120,000. The Democ- government use of tax cuts as an election- rats have not specified what the levels of the winning device perverts the real policy need rates should be. The key point is the amount for structural income tax reform and not just of revenue you need to raise, not what the periodic relief. For those members of the nominal rate should be. Rates are affected by coalition tax ginger group who think their what is fair, by progressivity considerations job is done, it is not. Much more structural and by what is internationally competitive. reform is still needed. We do of course recognise that other ele- If the government is determined on broad ments of welfare benefits will have to be tax cuts, I have had a public proposal out integrated and adjusted for this approach. So there as a contribution to the debate on per- our response has been to put forward our manent structural reform. As the Democrats own tax cuts amendments to delete the gov- taxation spokesperson, I have said that, be- ernment tax cuts provisions and to increase cause income tax reform is only affordable in the tax-free threshold from $6,000 to manageable stages, in priority order low in- $10,000. This would provide a $13 a week come should get attention first, then middle tax cut, which is $680 per annum, to all tax- and high income last. We think that structural payers. reform over a number of years should occur Because based on experience we expect in this priority order as it becomes afford- this amendment to be voted down by the able: firstly, raise the tax-free threshold to coalition and Labor, we will oppose the $10,000; then $12,500, which is the mini- higher income earners tax cuts but attempt to mum subsistence line, also known as the pass the low-income earners reduction in the poverty line; then towards $20,000, which $6,000 to $21,600—that is, 17 per cent—tax currently only some retired Australians en- bracket. That reduction is to 15 per cent. This joy. All Australians get a tax cut this way, but is the government proposal which provides a low-income earners benefit most with sub- $6 a week tax cut to all taxpayers earning stantial real disposable income increases. over $21,600. The Democrats proposal is Secondly, we have argued that we should much better for low-income earners—it is index the rates starting with the tax-free well over double for low-income earners— threshold. That is something for the coalition than the coalition’s proposal. ginger group to get a grip on—indexing the In our view, the government’s tax cuts rates. Thirdly, broaden the base. We have a priorities are all wrong. There is an urgent hit list of unnecessary welfare for the need for tax relief for low-income earners, wealthy and tax concessions in mind, includ- who actually have the highest effective tax ing, amongst others: exclusive tax cuts for rates of all. I believe that the Democrats tax high-income earners being funded by crack- position would not only provide greater ing down on tax concessions and loopholes benefits for low-income earners but also as- such as taxing trusts as companies, instead of sist the Australian economy materially. Last their present arrangements; excessively gen- week we saw the Industrial Relations Com- erous company car schemes, such as those mission produce a fair and balanced wage that the Ralph review castigated; income decision on the minimum wage that, pre-

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 11 dictably, was criticised by employer groups when what is needed is certainty in this area and the government for being too generous in a policy sense. and potentially costing jobs and by the The Democrats are critical of the present ACTU for being too mean and too lean. In- changes because they provide the highest terestingly, the Industrial Relations Commis- income earners—and bear in mind the re- sion noted the tax cuts in this year’s and last ports we have had about the number of mil- year’s budget and commented that the $17 a lionaires we are producing every week— week increase was needed to keep low- with a $4,502 annual tax cut but provide av- income earners increases in line with average erage taxpayers with only $312 per annum, wages. In their decision they said: or $6 a week. If you couple high-income ... we have also taken into account the benefits to earners’ income tax cuts with the ending of low-paid employees of changes in the tax and the superannuation surcharge, which is worth government transfer regimes which occurred dur- around $1,500 per annum to a high-income ing 2004 and which have been foreshadowed in earner, this represents a huge benefit to the Budget for 2005-06. We note, however, that higher income earners. while tax reductions will undoubtedly assist low- paid employees in absolute terms, their living The media have publicised the Democrats’ standards may not increase greatly in relative opposition to the tax cuts package, although terms when all of the changes in taxation and far fewer have said why we oppose it. The government benefits are taken into account. great majority of the media have ignored our In other words, if you want to address low- alternative tax proposal and our parliamen- income earners’ needs, you have to address tary strategy. That might be all right for them the taxation and welfare intersection. The if they want to take that attitude, but it is not Democrats proposal to increase the tax-free all right with respect to Labor, which is the threshold to $10,000 would provide a much alternative government in this country. Turn- fairer $680-a-year benefit to all taxpayers. It ing back to the Democrat plan, our $680-a- would also take the pressure off the Indus- year tax cut is double the Howard offer to trial Relations Commission, which has the low-income earners and slightly more than sole responsibility at present for lifting dis- the Beazley offer of $12 a week. It is a better posable income for those groups. tax cut than the Beazley plan for nearly eve- We believe that the government should be ryone earning under $60,000. For everyone providing more money for health and educa- earning under $65,000, it is a better tax cut tion. But, with a projected $9 billion surplus, than the Howard plan. In other words, it we are not opposed to tax cuts. Our approach picks up the vast majority of taxpayers. The is simple: we support tax cuts, but we believe Financial Review recently stated that there that low-income earners should get their tax are 1,801,805 Australians earning less than cut first, then the middle-income earners and $10,000. Most of these people do not cur- lastly the high-income earners. It is beyond rently pay tax. But, if our policy were sup- me why the Treasurer and the government ported, around 400,000 more taxpayers did not put together a full package and say: would no longer have to pay income tax. ‘This is the structural reform we are going to The Labor Party have proposed their own introduce. It will be introduced over a num- tax cuts, using the $21.7 billion from the tax ber of years. Here is the entire package.’ It cuts package and taking the rest from the just beats me why we have to persist with superannuation surcharge, totalling $24 bil- dribbling out these little gifts periodically lion. Their package includes an increased

CHAMBER 12 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 low-income earners rebate, greater tax cuts Amendment (Personal Income Tax Reduc- for middle-income earners and a top tax tion) Bill 2005 and to place on record some threshold of $100,000. The Labor Party pro- concerns with the government’s proposal as I posal is fairer than the government’s, but it believe that, in one particular area, the gov- does still favour high-income earners. It ernment could have done better. But, overall, lacks the consistency of the Democrats posi- the government’s proposal is one that One tion and it lacks the structural reform that we Nation supports. have built into our plan. The Democrats are First of all, I would like to place clearly on the only political party to have outlined a the record some statistics that are not gener- detailed, comprehensive tax plan which con- ally talked about in this chamber. We tend to tains structural reform rather than ad hoc, look at the dollar value that is being derived irregular tax cuts. We urge the major parties from individual people in set brackets in pay- and the media to consider our proposals or ing their tax, but we overlook the percentage listen to others who have structural reform in relation to government receipts that each proposals. We urge them to explain why they particular bracket pays. I would like to put should not support the plan that provides the those figures clearly on record. I will quote greatest assistance to hardworking low- from the 2002 and 2003 government receipts income earners, takes the pressure off the because they are the latest that we have Industrial Relations Commission to increase available. wages and provides in the future for the People paying tax in the 17 per cent proper relief that all taxpayers deserve. bracket pay 22 per cent of the entire receipts I return to the structural reform package that the government derives from taxation. that we have spelt out. We say that raising Those in the 30 per cent bracket pay 44 per the tax-free threshold is the first priority. In- cent of the receipts that the government de- dexing the rates is the second priority. We rives. Those in the 42 per cent bracket pay say the base should be broadened and the top eight per cent of the receipts. Those who pay rate should be raised. That would then con- 47 per cent and above pay 26 per cent of the stitute structural income tax reform. It should receipts. The area that I would like to focus be melded in with welfare reform, particu- on is those people who pay in the 30 per cent larly to encourage welfare to work. bracket—currently those whose taxable in- Over the last few weeks the big issue has come is between $21,600 and $58,000. The been the ATO’s regulations covering the government’s proposal for the 30 per cent taxation schedules. These schedules simply rate is that it will apply to people whose in- show employers in different industries how come falls between $21,600 and $63,000. much tax to deduct from an employee’s The government has done the right thing in wages based on a given salary level. These lifting the bracket for that group of people; regulations are subsequent to this legislation. however, I feel it would have been an addi- This legislation is the substantive issue that tional benefit if the government had intro- we have to deal with. The attention on the duced another bracket in that area. I believe regulations has, to our regret, taken the ten- it would have reflected better on the gov- sion off the question of the kinds of tax cuts ernment if it had split that current bracket that Australia really needs. into two, creating an additional bracket for Senator HARRIS (Queensland) (1.12 people whose income is between $21,601 pm)—I rise to speak on the Tax Laws and $40,000, and structuring that rate at 22.5 per cent. That would have given a large per-

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 13 centage of lower and middle income Austra- Senator Kemp—But you always support lians a considerable benefit in the tax that the Greens, Len! they pay. That is my only criticism of what Senator HARRIS—In the humour of the the government is putting forward. moment, I will accept the senator’s interjec- One Nation will support the government’s tion, and invite him to have a look at my vot- personal income tax reduction bill and will ing record. If he then wishes to withdraw that also oppose any disallowance motions on remark, I will accept it. regulations. The reason I make that statement Senator Fifield—It is a slur! very clear so early in my contribution to this Senator HARRIS—No, it is in the banter debate is because it is the prerogative of the of humour and I accept it as that. Speaking government of the day not only to administer briefly on Labor’s amendments, again we the revenues that they receive but also to set have an interesting situation. The govern- the levels of tax. If they do get it wrong— ment’s proposal for the 2005-06 year is for a and I have highlighted just one small area person who has an income between $6,001 where I think they have got it wrong—the and $21,600 to have a tax rate of 15 per people at the next election will cast their bal- cent—that is a reduction of two per cent that lots in relation to how they judge the gov- the government is proposing. I find it inter- ernment. That is called democracy, and that esting that, in the amendments to be moved is how this process should proceed. by Senator Sherry, the opposition’s proposal I will speak in further detail in the com- for the 2005-06 year for a person whose in- mittee stage in relation to Senator Murray’s come exceeds $6,000 but does not exceed amendments because I just have one ques- $21,600 is a rate of 17 per cent. Why on tion for him. What I find interesting in the earth would the opposition bring a proposal lead-up to this bill is what the Greens are into this chamber to lift the tax rates of a putting forward. They have made a statement percentage of people that they claim to sup- in the media that they will not support a dis- port? It is a funny way of supporting people. allowance motion, and I commend them for So, with those brief comments, I com- that. I believe that is the correct procedure. mend the government’s legislation, both the But then the Greens have tabled a second bill and the subsequent regulations, to the reading amendment which I find somewhat chamber. I look forward to some very inter- perplexing because the outcome, were it to esting explanations in the committee stage. succeed, would be this legislation not pro- ceeding. So we have the Greens on one hand Senator FIFIELD (Victoria) (1.22 pm)— saying, ‘We will not support a disallowance It gives me great pleasure to speak on the motion,’ and then on the other hand bringing Tax Laws Amendment (Personal Income Tax into the chamber an amendment which in Reduction) Bill 2005. This bill is all about actuality would send the bill off into the what coalition governments love to do—to never-never so that it would be irrelevant cut tax. On this side of the chamber we be- how they would vote on the disallowance lieve that the government should be as lim- motion on the regulations. I find that some- ited as possible, consistent with a compas- what perplexing, and I will be interested to sionate society. On this side of the chamber hear how the Greens can explain that not we believe that, where government interven- only to the chamber but also to the Austra- tion in the lives of individuals can be re- lian people. duced, it should be. The coalition have the strong conviction that Australians know bet-

CHAMBER 14 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 ter how to spend their money than the gov- cent of taxpayers from 2006-07. These tax ernment. This bill is a demonstration of that cuts also maintain the principle that 80 per belief. We seek to return to the Australian cent of taxpayers will be on a top rate of 30 public what is theirs, what is above and be- per cent or less. The personal income tax yond what the government needs to do its cuts delivered by this government have more job. Several budgets back the Treasurer es- than returned the proceeds of bracket creep. tablished a new fiscal principle, the principle If all this government had done was to index that essentially, once the government has the thresholds, people would be paying more paid for schools, hospitals, social services, tax today and into the future. security and defence and paid down debt, The way the government has been able to any money left over should be given back to cut taxes is remarkable given the Australian the Australian people in the form of tax cuts. Labor Party bequeathed it a $96 billion defi- That is what this budget does, and the Treas- cit. It is all the more remarkable given the urer again honoured that principle on budget Labor Party opposed every single measure night. designed to bring the budget back into sur- This government has cut taxes many times plus. It is all the more remarkable given the before—in 2000, 2003 and 2004—and, Sen- Labor Party opposed the tax cuts as part of ate willing, will do so again in 2005 and the new tax system. 2006. It is worth reminding the Senate that, I cannot talk about the tax cuts of 2000 in addition to the income tax cuts already without acknowledging the contribution of delivered, the government has done a tre- the Australian Democrats. The Australian mendous amount in cutting tax. It has cut Democrats from time to time know how to company tax twice, halved the capital gains be a responsible non-government party. We tax rate, funded the abolition of FID and should never forget the contribution of their BAD, undertaken a range of measures to then leader Senator Lees, Senator Murray crack down on tax avoiders and forced the and Senator Cherry in his former capacity as states to honour their agreement as part of an adviser to the Democrats. They were a the intergovernmental agreement of the new responsible party on the other side of this tax system—something which they should chamber. have done beforehand. But the Labor Party are at it yet again; This bill seeks to reduce personal income they are back in support of higher taxes. I taxes even further—providing for a fourth think Australians were stunned—senators on and fifth round of personal income tax cuts. this side of the chamber certainly were— It will reduce the 17 per cent rate to 15 per when on budget night the shadow Treasurer, cent. It will kick out the threshold for the 42 Mr Swan, declared on the 7.30 Report that per cent rate in two stages: from $58,000 to the Australian Labor Party would oppose $63,000 from 1 July this year and to $70,000 these tax cuts. That soon turned to disbelief from 1 July 2006. It will kick out the thresh- when the Australian Labor Party declared old for the top rate of 47 per cent in two that they would vote to disallow the 2005 stages: from $70,000 to $95,000 on 1 July schedules—that was one of their options; this year and to $125,000 on 1 July 2006. As that was their thermonuclear option. I have a a result of this bill, taxpayers will not reach copy of the schedules here from another the highest marginal tax rate until they earn place, which are yet to be tabled. These are around three times average weekly earnings, like cloves of garlic or a silver cross to a with the top rate applying to only three per

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 15 vampire. When you hold them up to Labor Howard came to office. Tax per taxpayer has you should see them reel back. They want to risen by over $12,200 under Treasurer stay as far away from these schedules as they Costello and GST is weighing very heavily possibly can. on Australian families. By 2008-09 the GST We on this side of the chamber want to bill per household will be almost $5,400, or hold Labor to account. It was farcical watch- over $100 per week. ing Senator Conroy plead with the tax com- It is revealing to look at who is bearing missioner at estimates to provide him with an the burden of tax. Despite the Liberal gov- exit, to provide Labor with an escape clause. ernment’s claims to the contrary, successive He tried to blame somehow the tax commis- changes to the personal income tax scales sioner for this situation because he was obey- have left low- and middle-income earners ing the law. The tax commissioner is not in a paying as much if not more tax than in 1996, position to provide an exit strategy for the with higher income earners paying less. For Labor Party. This is a situation of their own example, a worker on average earnings— making. The Australian Labor Party have got around $51,000 a year—will lose 22.5 per it wrong, and they know it. Senators opposite cent of their earnings in tax after the budget’s should do the decent thing. They should con- proposed changes. That is the same average vince their leader to abandon this bloody- tax rate they faced in 1996. A worker on half minded farce, allow the schedules, vote for the average wage will lose 15.1 per cent of the bill and get out of the way. I commend their earnings in tax, a hike from the 12.9 per this bill to the Senate. cent average tax rate they faced in 1996. It is Senator SHERRY (Tasmania) (1.28 a very different story for higher income pm)—The Liberal government has missed a earners. Someone on 2½ times the average great opportunity to engage in long-term re- wage—around $130,000 a year—will lose form of the taxation system. It has managed 33.4 per cent of their earnings in tax, a cut to spend some $22 billion on personal cuts from the average tax rate of 36.1 per cent without delivering any real reform. There is average tax rate that they faced in 1996. no fundamental reform of the taxation sys- These figures expose the government’s at- tem in the Tax Laws Amendment (Personal tempts to assert that low-income earners Income Tax Reduction) Bill 2005, which we have benefited most from their tax cuts. In are considering. The tax measures are ad hoc fact, the opposite is true: someone on half the and not part of any integrated strategy to average wage is paying more than $600 a boost participation and productivity. The year more in tax than they would have if the overall tax package has clearly been thrown average tax rate which they faced in 1996 together quickly with no real vision and, as a applied today. consequence, the great bulk of taxpayers in Mr Costello’s tax package says a lot about this country on low and middle incomes con- who he believes is entitled to have aspira- tinue to carry the overwhelming proportion tions for themselves and their families. His of the tax burden. message was that unless you are on or ap- Notwithstanding these tax cuts, this will proaching a six-figure salary you are not still be the highest taxing government in worthy of incentive and a decent tax cut. You Australia’s history, with a total tax at almost see, in the Treasurer’s world, if you are a $235 billion in 2005-06. This is an increase hardworking family slogging your guts out of over 100 per cent, a doubling since Mr on a combined household income of $70,000—perhaps with a principal earner on

CHAMBER 16 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

$45,000 and a secondary income of eral government is that high-income earners $25,000—you do not have aspirations for deserve a tax cut 10 times bigger, and that is yourself or your kids: that is the logic of the not including the abolition of the surcharge Treasurer’s argument. You only qualify for tax on superannuation, which I will deal with some token tax relief—a paltry $6 each for in some detail when we get to that bill. which you should be grateful, according to The Liberal government thinks it is fair to the Treasurer. give 45 per cent, or almost half, of the $22 Labor’s package before the Senate today billion value of the tax cuts to Australian will set out a fairer alternative and give these workers earning in the top 10 per cent—one middle-income earners $12 each per week or in 10. This is a disproportionate skewing of $24 for the family. High-income earners tax relief of the most extreme kind. Let us would do well out of Labor’s alternative put this into perspective, because there is a package—not as well as under the Liberal pattern of behaviour here. As it currently government’s proposal, but they would still stands, over the nine years since the intro- do well. Let us take the example of middle- duction of the GST to fix what was allegedly income earners: a steelworker in Wollongong a broken tax system—that was the argument on $80,000, $90,000, or even $100,000 a at the time—those on $50,000, average year would get roughly the same tax cut as weekly earnings, will have received just $10 they would under Labor’s proposal as they a week from this government. That is just would from the Liberal government. But it is over $1 a year in tax cuts. Compare that with the higher income earners, earning more than a high-income earner on $125,000, who will $100,000, who would not do as well under have received almost $120 a week over the the Labor proposal. same period. This government has been no There is a profound difference between friend of low- and middle-income earners. Labor and the Liberal-National government. As I described earlier, since 1996 only those We believe in aspirations for everyone. You on significantly more than average weekly see, the Labor Party are the real party earnings have seen their average tax rates founded on aspiration. The Liberal Party’s fall. Average income earners are paying as political existence is based on opportunity much tax as they were in 1996 as a propor- for an exclusive few and aspiration only for tion of their wages. Those on half of average high-income earners. We say this and we say earnings are actually paying more tax. it with conviction: whether you lift a pick, What has happened here has been the tap away at a keyboard, mind children or gouging of tax through bracket creep from sick patients, run a small business or work low-and middle-income earners to provide down a mine, you should receive a fair re- the only real average tax cuts to those earn- ward for your efforts. ing significantly more than average earnings. Let us have a look at fairness; let us shine To grow the economy we need to give eve- a light on how skewed these tax cuts are to ryone incentive, not just a few. This is such a just 280,000 high-income earners who earn short-sighted approach from the Liberal- more than $125,00 a year. These are the peo- National government. ple Mr Costello believes deserve a tax cut Labor sees a fairer way forward: the fairer more than 10 times that of the seven million way that we are fighting for and which we low-and middle-income earners making up have been arguing for over the last few to $63,000 a year. The argument of the Lib- weeks, and which we will continue to fight

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 17 for as long as we are in this place. The fig- paid, the best way to tackle them is to stop ures I touched on earlier do not include the tax and social security income tests doubling significant tax cut to high-income earners up—it is as simple as that. That is why La- that is in addition to the income tax cut—that bor’s alternative proposals lift the effective is, the abolition of the surcharge tax on su- tax rate threshold to $10,000 over time perannuation that will provide a further tax through the provision of a welfare to work cut of between $35 and $40 a week plus for tax bonus, removing tax on an income high-income earners on more than $125,000 equivalent to two-thirds of the taper rate of a a year. single-allowance recipient. The other key Labor is also proposing a genuine tax re- element of Labor’s proposal is to lift to form package that tackles the issue of par- $26,400 the income threshold where the 30c ticipation in our economy. Any serious marginal tax rate cuts in. This would signifi- analysis of the government’s budget shows it cantly reduce the overlap between the part- was not up to the participation challenge. ner allowance income test and the 30c rate, Labor’s tax package is designed to improve which currently combines to produce unac- participation, particularly for those on lower ceptably high effective marginal tax rates for incomes who are likely to have the strongest many couples. behavioural response. Labour market behav- A recent example of this problem was ioural studies of so-called elasticities suggest highlighted with the decision to increase the that low-income earners are more likely to minimum wage. Thanks to the Liberal gov- re-enter the work force or work longer hours ernment’s incentive-sapping tax and social when given added incentives. This means security system, for a single-income family reducing effective marginal tax rates among with children relying on the minimum wage, low-income earners and part-time workers. $17.65 of the recent $17 per week increase is That has a very strong effect on labour mar- clawed back in tax and lost social security. ket participation and hours worked. The family faces an effective marginal tax Labor agrees that our highest marginal tax rate of 104 per cent. So what does the gov- rates need to be more internationally com- ernment do about this problem in the budget? petitive, and our approach reflects that. But Very little. If the Liberal government adopted we believe the first priority should be sorting Labor’s tax proposals, such families would out the disincentive problems at the lower see their effective marginal tax rate fall from end of the scale, because that is what is 104 per cent to 70 per cent. Compared to the really dragging down work force participa- government’s plan, Labor’s plan would see tion. The truth is that the government’s half- such families have a near halving in their hearted reforms do not do enough to undo marginal tax rate, from 30c to 17c. Com- the tangle between tax and social security pared to the government’s plan, the take- income tests that combine to produce punish- home component of the wage increase would ing effective marginal tax rates. Labor’s be almost 70 per cent higher under Labor’s strategy for addressing high effective mar- proposal. ginal tax rates is superior to the govern- I challenge Liberal-National senators to ment’s strategy. support Labor’s tax package. It gives fami- Because these high MTRs are caused lies on the minimum wage more incentives when social security payments are being and more take-home pay. Labor does not withdrawn at the same time as tax is being argue that these reforms will solve all the problems at once. The structural reforms

CHAMBER 18 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 necessary will take time. But at least Labor is out of the interest rate red zone before the making a start with its package. These re- bulk of tax cuts flows through. Even then, forms put us a good way down a path on Labor’s package aims to fight inflation by which tax and social security interactions can offering better incentives to encourage peo- be untangled and punishingly high effective ple to move from welfare to work to boost marginal tax rates can be eliminated or kept labour supply. The government has not been to a bare minimum. interested in debating the substance of La- Labor has proposed a number of amend- bor’s package, and here is why: it offers lar- ments to be moved in the committee stage. I ger tax cuts to low- and middle-income earn- will be dealing with them later. Labor calls ers, better incentives to move off benefits on the senators opposite to support a fairer and into work, and larger tax cuts on retirees’ way forward for all those Australia taxpayers investment returns than the government’s who make our economy stronger. From 1 package. January 2006, the government should lift the Labor will be giving Liberal government effective tax-free threshold for those moving members an opportunity to vote for Labor’s from welfare to work and for other low- fairer alternative. As this debate proceeds, income earners by introducing a welfare to government senators can vote for doubling work tax bonus that replaces the existing the tax relief to the considerable majority of low-income tax offset. Secondly, it should constituents on average earnings, or they can extend the income range where the lowest vote to ensure that not just high-income 17c marginal tax rate applies by raising the earners but they themselves—particularly threshold where the 30c rate cuts in from when we take into account the surcharge— $21,600 to $26,400. This will improve incen- receive a massive tax cut of around $130 per tives for low-income earners to return to week. In terms of the surcharge tax cut— work and will deliver a tax cut of $12 per which I will deal with later in the week—no week for low- and middle-income earners. wonder members of the government stomped From 1 July 2006, the government should their feet and hooted when the Treasurer an- extend the income range where the 30c mar- nounced it on budget night! ginal tax rate applies by raising the threshold If government senators oppose Labor’s where the 42c rate cuts in from $63,000 to proposals, Labor will be only too happy to $67,000. This will compensate middle- and campaign in their home states. Government high-income earners for the effects of senators stand to gain $9,200 a year, while bracket creep and ensure that at least 80 per average earners will get just $6 a week. cent of taxpayers pay a marginal tax rate of Every Liberal and National Party senator 30c in the dollar or less over the forward should go back to their home state and ex- estimates. The government should also ex- plain why they will not support Labor’s plan tend the income range where the 42c mar- for a $12 a week tax cut for low- and middle- ginal tax rate applies by lifting the threshold income earners. They will talk about any- where the 47c rate cuts in from $80,000 to thing else. They will talk about schedules $100,000 per annum. This will improve the and disallowable instruments. They will international competitiveness of our tax sys- make wild claims about tax cuts being de- tem. layed and about software providers such as Labor’s proposal is fairer. It takes the pru- MYOB complaining that users are not suffi- dent approach of waiting until the country is ciently literate to enter a password and push a button to select alternative schedules. They

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 19 are all smokescreens to divert attention away colleagues in the House of Representatives from the central issue in the debate—which in which there is an overwhelming major- is why, under the Liberal government, aver- ity—70 per cent—of low- and middle- age income earners will gain just $6 a week income earners for whom, under your deal, while those on higher incomes of $125,000 a because you are the doormat of the govern- year or more will gain $65 a week. That is 10 ment, you support a $6 a week tax cut. Labor times what is being delivered to low- and supports our package of a $12 a week tax middle-income Australians, and that is with- cut. (Time expired) out the value of the surcharge tax cut, which Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) adds another $35 or $40 a week. In the inter- (1.48 pm)—The Tax Laws Amendment (Per- ests of their constituents, we challenge Lib- sonal Income Tax Reduction) Bill 2005 fa- eral and National Party senators either to cilitates another redistribution of wealth to- support Labor’s fairer package or to explain wards the well off and away from disadvan- why they believe they should get a tax cut 10 taged Australians, and also away from public times the size of the tax cut for seven million investment in essential services such as pro- hardworking Australians—workers on aver- tecting the environment and looking after our age incomes with aspirations for themselves public health and education services. This and their families. government is asking the Senate to waste I live on the north-west coast of Tasmania $26 billion of public funds by frittering it in the electorate of Braddon. I looked at away on a $6 a week tax cut for low- to mid- some very interesting figures last week. dle-income earners and an $86 a week tax Some 97 per cent of residents on the north- cut for the wealthy. That is on top of abolish- west coast of Tasmania earn an income of ing the superannuation surcharge for high- less than $60,000 a year. It is an overwhelm- income earners and cutting business taxation. ingly low- and middle-income electorate on There is nothing in this budget for the least the north-west coast of Tasmania. I publicly well off. In fact, the government wants to challenge the local Liberal member, Mr punish the people who are the least well off Baker. Labor’s proposal is much better in and make life harder for poorer Australians terms of delivering a much more significant with its Welfare to Work policy. The tax cuts tax cut to the overwhelming majority of resi- in this budget come on top of last year’s dents who live on the north-west coast of $14.7 billion of tax cuts—again, directed at Tasmania. It is certainly amongst the low- the wealthy. est—if not the lowest—of low- and middle- The Australian Greens oppose these tax income electorates in Australia. As an inter- cuts. There is a much better and fairer way to esting aside, only approximately 500 to 600 spend these funds. We will be asking the people—a relatively small number—on the Senate to support our amendment, which north-west coast of Tasmania pay the sur- calls on the government to redirect these per- charge tax on superannuation. sonal income tax cuts into investment in pub- Senator McGauran—You were against lic health, public education and the environ- it, weren’t you? ment—investment that serves everyone. The Senator SHERRY—Senator McGauran government’s decision to waste $26 billion from the long irrelevant National Party inter- on tax cuts means that $26 billion will no jects. Senator McGauran, you should have a longer be available to spend on these essen- good look at some of the electorates of your tial services—things such as responding to the crisis facing farming communities. Not

CHAMBER 20 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 two weeks after the Treasurer delivered the that the cash will do more for the nation in budget, a major gathering of drought affected the pockets of rich people than by investing farmers in my home state of New South in the long-term future of this land and its Wales prompted the government into action. people. But the Greens say that it was not nearly Treasurer Costello, travelling the country enough action. The government’s drought to talk up his budget, made a frank admission relief package that provides an extra $250 when, as quoted in the Sydney Morning Her- million is more bandaid stuff. There is noth- ald on 17 May, he said: ing to address the long-term issues and there … I reckon you would be struggling on $40- is nothing to get on with the difficult but es- 50,000 in Australia if you were paying a mort- sential task of making our land management gage and raising some kids. ecologically and socially sustainable. Treasurer Costello, this amount, which you One of Australia’s most respected scien- say you would be struggling on, is almost tists, Peter Cullen of the Wentworth Group— twice as much as the current federal mini- who won the Prime Minister’s Environmen- mum wage, which your government believes talist of the Year award in 2001—has been is too high. Last week’s minimum wage case trying to gain the attention of political deci- decision by the Australian Industrial Rela- sion makers about the urgency of the task, tions Commission took the annual income of but they do not seem to be listening. Peter some of the lowest paid workers in Australia Cullen is calling for Australia to recognise to $25,188. What does Treasurer Costello’s that some land under farming is too marginal comment that people are struggling if they for the task and is calling on them to develop are earning between $40,000 and $50,000 a plan to change the way that the land is say about the people on the federal minimum used. I am hearing increasing calls from wage which the government thinks is too farmers who are suggesting that drought re- high at $25,188? lief should be tied to improving land man- That minimum wage would be $2,600 less agement and that one of the criteria for per year if the Australian Industrial Relations drought relief should be sustainable land Commission had listened to the argument put management. by the federal government each year about They are proposing that, in cases where what level the minimum wage should be set farming is not ecologically sustainable, we at. Those people would be earning around need to develop plans about how to keep $23,000 a year if the Australian Industrial rural communities economically and socially Relations Commission had listened to the viable. This might involve paying people not federal government about what the minimum to farm but rather to manage the land in a wage should be. If people on $40,000 to sustainable way for the benefits that it deliv- $50,000 are struggling, it would be interest- ers to the environment. This is the kind of ing to hear what the Treasurer thinks about project that ought to be receiving govern- the minimum wage that the government ment funding, not as an ad hoc payment but wants—$23,000. Would people on that be as part of strategic planning for a sustainable struggling, Treasurer? So the Treasurer’s future on this dry continent to safeguard our apparent concern for battlers is transparent ecosystems, our economic development and because, when he had the opportunity in this our prosperity. We have the money. As a na- budget and in many before, he decided not to tion, we are swimming in it, according to the support them. In fact, he decided that, government, but the Treasurer seems to think

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 21 through this budget, he would take from the structures on which the tax rate is only 30 poor to give to the wealthy. per cent; income splitting, including through The Australian Greens also have concerns family trusts; and salary sacrificing for su- with other tax reforms that have been put perannuation and executive shares. The Aus- forward in this budget. The Greens opposed tralian Council of Social Service, ACOSS, the goods and services tax when it was intro- estimates that the annual cost to the federal duced, because it undermined the progres- government of these measures is $6 billion. sive tax system by levying a flat tax on eve- That is $6 billion that could be saved by ryone. Irrespective of your capacity to pay, a closing these loopholes for high-income flat tax is levied on essential goods and ser- earners and could be invested into our essen- vices—electricity, gas, telephone or what- tial public services. However, the govern- ever it may be. This budget further under- ment chooses to leave that $6 billion open as mines the progressive elements of our taxa- opportunities for income for high-income tion system through the personal income tax earners rather than investing it in our com- scales. munity and public services. Income redistribution is an essential tool Wealthy people can often also artificially of any government in order to be able to re- lower their incomes through negative gearing distribute wealth. It is particularly important and dividend imputation, which means that in Australia. We have a relatively high rate of their gross income is not an accurate guide to poverty compared with other OECD coun- their final tax bill. Wealthy people also often tries. The combined cost of tax cuts to high- qualify for a range of government benefits, income earners from the last budget and this like the proposed child-care rebate, the pri- budget will be $4.08 billion next financial vate health insurance rebate, the govern- year and $6.23 billion in 2006-07. Cutting ment’s superannuation co-contribution for tax for high-income earners is simply unjus- low-income spouses or partners, and family tified. There are not many more people pay- tax benefit part B, which is not means tested ing tax at the top two income rates now on household income. All these government compared to when the coalition came into benefits, as well as tax cuts, are available to government, and only a small proportion of those who are well off. taxpayers earn very high salaries. For exam- Despite all the claims that Australia’s tax ple, only two per cent of full-time employees system is driving people out of the country, currently earn above $100,000 per annum, Australia’s top marginal tax rate is not par- and the people in that category—which I am ticularly high when compared with that in privileged to belong to as a member of par- many other OECD countries. In France, the liament—have, like me every year I have top marginal personal income tax rate is been in parliament, been delivered a tax cut 42.62 per cent, in Germany and Italy it is 45 by the budget. I do not need that tax cut. We per cent, and in the United Kingdom it is 40 do not need that tax cut. The Australian per cent. Australia’s total tax take is low community and our public services need that compared with that in other OECD countries, investment and that money committed there. and so is our total income tax take as a per- As we know, high-income earners already centage of gross average wage earnings. For have a large number of legal avenues avail- example, in Australia in 2002 it equalled 24 able to them for reducing their income tax— per cent, compared with 43 per cent in Den- things like channelling it through company mark, 41 per cent in Germany and Belgium, and 30 per cent in Sweden.

CHAMBER 22 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

While the measures in this bill benefit the Chen’s mobile phone while he was still in wealthy at a cost to national wellbeing, they the immigration office making his applica- also deprive the Commonwealth of funds tion for protection? Does the minister believe that it could use to do things like alleviate that her department has properly carried out poverty. According to NATSEM, the Na- its responsibilities in dealing with Mr Chen’s tional Centre for Social and Economic Mod- application for protection? elling, poverty affects almost two million Senator VANSTONE—I thank the sena- Australians. In a report on income inequality tor for his question. Senator Evans, there is a that was released after the budget, the St short answer to two of your questions: the Vincent de Paul Society presents a stark pic- first one is no and the second one is yes. But ture of the growing disparity in incomes be- let me elaborate on why I cannot confirm tween the highest and lowest earners and the what you have alleged in your question. I continuing failure to reverse the trend. Be- draw your attention to a press release put out tween 1994-95 and 2002-03, private house- by the department on 8 June, which I as- hold income for the bottom 10 per cent of sume, if you are interested in this matter, you Australians rose by just $26 a week, but for will have seen. I see that you are not giving the top 10 per cent it rose by $762 a week. me any indication of whether or not you That is a difference of $736 a week depend- have seen that press release, so I will read ing on which end of the income bracket you the relevant portions of the release into the are in. As the report by St Vincent de Paul Hansard for you. It begins by saying that the notes, inequality of income is the open door department issued the release because it to inequality in access to health services, wanted to ‘correct misleading reports and housing, education, transport— place on record the facts’. There are four dot Debate interrupted. points under that. The first reads: QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE • Mr Chen contacted the NSW office of Asylum Seekers DIMIA wanting to speak with the previous State Director. When told that person no Senator CHRIS EVANS (2.00 pm)—My longer worked for the Department he question is directed to Senator Vanstone, the requested to speak with the current State Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Director. He gave no indication of the subject and Indigenous Affairs. Can the minister he wished to discuss. confirm whether her departmental officials I might sidetrack to indicate that the current contacted the Chinese embassy or consulate state director has been there from September in relation to a request for political asylum last year. The previous state director was they had just received from a Chinese diplo- there until the end of June last year. The mat, Mr Chen Yonglin? Wasn’t Mr Chen’s second dot point in the release reads: request for protection based on Mr Chen’s • As Mr Chen claimed to be a diplomatic fears for his own and his family’s safety if official, a DIMIA officer advised him that the Chinese government were to be alerted to she proposed to confirm this with the his application? Why then did the minister’s Consulate. Mr Chen provided telephone department put Mr Chen’s future at risk by numbers to do this and did not indicate a contacting the consulate to verify his identity problem with his identity being confirmed in and diplomatic status? Can the minister con- this manner. firm that this departmental disclosure imme- The media release continues: diately prompted the consulate to call Mr

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 23

• A DIMIA officer accordingly telephoned the disclose anything because in fact at the time Consulate, which confirmed that Mr Chen neither the DIMIA officer who made the call worked there. The DIMIA officer then ended nor anyone else, as I understand it, knew the call without providing any other what it was that Mr Chen wanted. information. Senator Chris Evans—So why did they • At the time of the conversation with the Consulate, the Department had no call? knowledge of the matter that Mr Chen Senator VANSTONE—To confirm that wished to discuss. At no time during this call this man was who he said he was. (Time ex- did the DIMIA officer disclose any pired) information as to the whereabouts of Mr Whaling Chen or the reason for DIMIA’s inquiry. Given those facts, you will see why I say, Senator CHAPMAN (2.05 pm)—I direct ‘No, I can’t confirm that which you allege,’ my question to the Minister for the Environ- and why I say, ‘Yes, I am happy with the ment and Heritage. Will the minister advise way in which my department has handled the Senate as to what the Howard govern- this.’ ment is doing to strengthen support within the International Whaling Commission for Senator CHRIS EVANS—Mr President, Australia’s stand against the resumption of I ask a supplementary question. I thank the commercial whaling? Has the minister con- minister for her answer. I was really seeking sidered any alternative approaches to this to find out whether she had further informa- issue? tion to what the department had said. I ask the minister: is she aware that section 336F Senator IAN CAMPBELL—I thank of the Migration Act prohibits the unauthor- Senator Chapman for his question on an is- ised disclosure of information identifying an sue which I know all Australians are deeply applicant for a protection visa to the foreign concerned about. Australians have, in over- government from whom the protection is whelming numbers, supported the actions of sought? Is the minister satisfied with her de- those nations, including Australia, who seek partment’s dealing with Mr Chen’s applica- to bring about an end to whaling. Not every- tion? Is she personally satisfied that they one will remember that Senator Chapman, in have acted properly and that they have acted a previous Liberal government, was at the in his best interests in dealing with his appli- forefront of efforts to encourage former cation? Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser to take a leadership role in bringing in the moratorium Senator VANSTONE—We have from the on whaling. Leader of the Opposition in the Senate the mistake that some senators opposite fall into, The question relates to how we have gone and that is reading out your supplementary about seeking to improve the position of pro- question disregarding completely the answer conservation nations within the International that you have been given. The answer that Whaling Commission. That commission will the leader was given made it very clear that meet in Korea in a few days time. I will be the officer rang the consulate, having told Mr leading the delegation to what is the 57th Chen that that was what he was going to do. meeting of that commission. There is no In fact, Mr Chen gave the officer some doubt that, based on advice from my depart- numbers to confirm that he was who he said ment and from other countries around the he was. Equally, the DIMIA officer did not world, for the first time in many years there is a risk of there being a majority of pro-

CHAMBER 24 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 whaling countries within that commission. in this—the Prime Minister has written to his That of course would be a tragedy for the opposite number in Japan and I have written world. It would be a tragedy for generations to all of the like-minded nations throughout of Australians—in both political parties, I the IWC. There has also been a campaign might add. across Australia, with lord mayors writing to Under both Mr Whitlam and Mr Fraser sister cities. I note that this has occurred right there was a bipartisan approach to try to stop across Australia. Senator Gary Humphries whaling, and that has continued. With a vote wrote to the mayor of his sister city in Japan. on what is called the revised management Also writing were the mayors of Redcliffe in scheme—basically a plan on how to go about Queensland and of Port Stephens in New whaling and how to reopen commercial South Wales. Today I got a letter from the whaling—for the first time in many years Mayor of Fremantle, Peter Tagliaferri, who there is a risk that there will be a majority in has written to his opposite number. The only favour of whaling. I have been working to person who seems to be a bit out of step on try and stop that occurring since July last this is one local member. I think it is the year, when I was appointed as minister. We member for Brand. Instead of sending a let- have not only been working with like- ter to Japan, he decided to get his constitu- minded countries but also approaching coun- ents to write to me. Could I remind the con- tries that are not members of the Interna- stituents of Brand that I am opposed to whal- tional Whaling Commission and that we be- ing and that, if Mr Beazley wants to help, he lieve share our strong whale conservation should write to the Japanese and not to me. stance to join the commission. (Time expired) In the last fortnight I also embarked on a Asylum Seekers trip to 11 countries—all but one of which are Senator KIRK (2.10 pm)—My question members of the IWC—to try to get more is to Senator Vanstone, the Minister for Im- support for the Australian position. I can re- migration and Multicultural and Indigenous port that we did receive some encouraging Affairs. Why was Mr Chen’s request for asy- feedback both in Europe and in the Pacific lum not treated as a bona fide request to be during my trip. The importance of the visit dealt with according to law? When was the was to ensure that, rather than just relying on minister advised of Minister Downer’s rejec- the whaling commissioners—who quite of- tion of Mr Chen’s initial application for pro- ten in the past have not always voted in the tection? Can the minister advise whether this way their cabinets may have chosen that they ministerial decision was made within 24 do—we raised the issue to the highest levels hours of the application? What was the rea- of government, both in Europe and in the son for that rejection? Why was Mr Chen Pacific. I was very pleased to see, for exam- being told to apply for other forms of visa ple, the Prime Minister of the Solomon Is- whilst also being told that the prospects of lands joining me at a press conference to success were extremely unlikely? Where commit that his cabinet would support Aus- exactly is the departmental consideration of tralia’s opposition to scientific whaling and Mr Chen’s applications up to now? would abstain from the vote on reopening Senator VANSTONE—Senator, I simply commercial whaling. reject outright your assertion that his contact As to the other things we have done—and was not treated as bona fide in any particular Senator Chapman would be very interested way.

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 25

Opposition senators interjecting— draw your attention to the earlier Hansard. Senator VANSTONE—This is a very se- (Time expired) rious matter and I am satisfied that it has Immigration been handled in an appropriate way, but Senator SCULLION (2.13 pm)—My clearly the opposition are not. One would question is to the Minister for Immigration have thought that if they wanted the answer and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, they would wait and listen to the answer. I Senator Vanstone. Will the minister inform am not satisfied of that assertion. DIMIA the Senate about the Howard government’s would not be in a position to offer advice on commitment to meeting Australia’s skilled the likely outcome of any visa because it migration needs to keep our economy grow- may be the decision maker, so DIMIA has ing? Is the minister aware of any alternative not offered advice with respect to likely out- policies? comes. Some advice was offered as to what Senator VANSTONE—The Australian opportunities there were to stay in Australia. government announced an additional 20,000 Any questions in relation to DFAT advice places for skilled migrants in the upcoming should be addressed to the Minister for For- financial year 2005-06, meaning that the eign Affairs. skilled migration program will jump from Senator KIRK—Mr President, I ask a around 70,000 to just over 90,000. This is the supplementary question. Given the bungling largest increase in history and it will bring of Mr Chen’s applications and the disclosure the number of places available for skilled of sensitive information to the very foreign migrants to nearly 100,000—it is about government from which he was seeking pro- 97,000. That is a very important point to re- tection for himself and his family, does the flect on: the largest ever increase in skilled minister stand by all of the actions taken by immigration. her department in relation to Mr Chen Why are we able to do that? Because we Yonglin and his family? have an economy that is continually grow- Senator VANSTONE—It is not at all the ing, we have brought down the appalling case that this has been handled inappropri- unemployment rate that existed under the ately—quite the opposite. I am aware that previous government. Under the previous some people would like to make the case that government you did not have to worry too that has happened, but I reject that assertion. much about skilled immigration because the I particularly reject an allegation being put previous government put skilled workers out into a question that sensitive information has of jobs. If you were running a company, all been disclosed to a government from which you had to do was put an ad in the paper and someone is seeking protection. The answer have a look around. There would be plenty to that was given in an earlier question. It has of skilled workers that Labor had put out of been out in the public domain since 8 June jobs—plenty. So you did not need to worry, and there is very little a government can do, because when you had a million unemployed other than respond to allegations in the me- you could find a skilled person for your fac- dia by putting out a statement and making tory any time you wanted. That was the way clear what happened on that day. I can help Labor managed skilled tradespeople in this you, Senator, if you want to have it repeated. country: it put them out of work. A million Mr Chen claimed to be an official and he people were out of work. was advised that the officer proposed—I

CHAMBER 26 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

So now we are very pleased to have a some say in whom we bring into Australia. situation where the unemployment rate has Thirdly, there will be an increase in the gen- been brought down. Employers now find it eral skilled migration pool so that smaller more challenging to find the people they businesses that do not have a human resource need. It is now a situation where people department and other capacity will be able to looking for work have much greater confi- benefit from this increase. In summary, I am dence that they will be able to get a job. The very proud to be part of a government that tables have turned, because now the workers has given the workers of Australia the oppor- of Australia can be picky and choosy about tunity to be in a situation where they pick where they go to work. Under Labor, the and choose whom they work for, and I am irony was that the employers could be picky proud to be in a country where we want to and choosy about whom they took on. We bring in more skilled workers. have given Australian workers the power to Immigration be picky and choosy about where they go to Senator LUDWIG (2.18 pm)—My ques- work. That is the real irony: the party that tion is to Senator Vanstone, the Minister for says it is here to protect the workers put them Immigration and Multicultural and Indige- out of jobs and gave employers the greatest nous Affairs. My question concerns the ex- opportunity to just take whom they wanted plosive allegations levelled last night by a off the streets. It is this party—it is not the DIMIA whistleblower. Can the minister con- first recognised as the party for workers— firm that officials from Queensland Health, that has been the best supporter of battling police and corrective services have already workers in Australia that this country has stated that they are unable to testify before ever seen, because it has given them jobs and the Palmer inquiry due to a lack of basic ju- created a situation where they can now pick dicial protections? Is the minister also aware and choose where they go to work. that the Lateline whistleblower, known only Senator, in relation to your question, I am as ‘Jamie’, is too afraid to give evidence to very pleased with this substantial increase in Mr Palmer or to Mr Comrie because he fears immigration because it shows that we are a retribution and that he has alleged that de- well-run government, we have a well-run partmental officers have already been moved country and we can afford to grow and bring out of sensitive areas so they cannot be more people in, which in turn will make the called before the inquiry? Is it time that the economy stronger and provide even more minister admitted that the closed-door jobs for Australians. We hope that this in- Palmer inquiry is an abject failure with no crease will come from three particular focal powers to protect witnesses or to compel areas. Firstly, it will come from working with testimony from responsible officers who employers to make sure they understand that have been hidden elsewhere in the depart- they can sponsor people to come. The person ment? Is it not now time for the minister to who knows best the skills they need in their have a royal commission? factory or their office is the employer. Sec- Senator VANSTONE—I am aware of the ondly, we plan to expand the use of state and Lateline program that was run last night with territory sponsored visas, because states, ter- allegations from an alleged whistleblower ritories and regional areas understand what within the department. I have had a quick development is coming on in their area and look at the transcript of that program. There they understand what skills they will need. is some history here that might be relevant. We have given them the capacity to have

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 27

Lateline, in an earlier program, alleged that Things have gone wrong in every case load, par- they had a whistleblower who was not, at ticularly in the refugee and compliance areas. that point, identified. In that program, I indi- Can the minister confirm that it continues to cated that if anyone—in the department, par- be the case that without judicial protections ticularly, but also outside—had concerns, being offered to these people they will not they should raise them firstly with the secre- come forward to the Palmer inquiry and that tary of the department or, if they were not a royal commission is the only way that wit- happy with that, with their minister. That nesses such as Jamie and the departments of piece was put to air by Lateline. The follow- police and corrective services will come ing question from Lateline was: ‘and would forward? you agree to see someone if they approached Senator VANSTONE—We have one per- you?’ The automatic and immediate answer son identifying themselves as a whistle- was yes. Lateline editors can answer why blower with what appeared at first glance to they chose not to run that portion of the pro- be general claims. They are of course impos- gram. I do not know whether the person in- sible to test. The real test of whether some- terviewed last night saw that and why they one is prepared to step forward and get have chosen to go to the media as opposed to something corrected, is for them to come going where any public servant should go forward with a specific case that can be in- first—that is, to their secretary or, if not, to vestigated, measured and tested. But that has their minister. But, in any event, I am aware not happened. I have already indicated that I of the allegations by one person. will have a good look at the transcript and The previous person who made allega- see if there is anything I can do in that re- tions turned out to be no longer employed by spect. DIMIA, and I thought the previous set of As to an inquiry of corrective services, I allegations were quite easily answered. I will think there was an inquiry in Queensland have a close look, when I get a minute, at into corrective services, the transcripts of what this person has had to say and see if which, you might remember, Senator, were there is anything I can do with it. As to who shredded. As I recall, they were shredded. has and has not been approached by the Was that a Queensland government that did Palmer inquiry, that is a matter for Mr that? Has the Queensland government given Palmer to comment on. I simply make the Mr Doomadgee, who has lost his life, a royal point that at the moment Ms Rau is in a men- commission? Let me help you with the an- tal health facility in South Australia and get- swer to that. The answer is no. (Time ex- ting all the appropriate support that she pired) needs. Calls, from Queensland in particular, Asylum Seekers for a public inquiry are somewhat puzzling in light of the Queensland government’s re- Senator STOTT DESPOJA (2.23 pm)— sponse to the death of Mr Doomadgee. My question is for the Minister for Justice and Customs and representing the Attorney- Senator LUDWIG—Mr President, I ask General. What steps has ASIO or any other a supplementary question. Minister, given government agency taken to investigate the your earlier assurances of a low error rate in substance of Mr Chen’s claims? In particular, handling your portfolio, can you explain how has the government sought to investigate the this fits in with the whistleblower’s claim that: claim by Mr Chen that a Chinese student was kidnapped by the Chinese government while

CHAMBER 28 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 he was studying in Australia, in an attempt to matters. If I can provide any further informa- lure his father, a Chinese official, Mr Lan Fu, tion on that issue within those parameters, I back to China, where he was later sentenced will. to death? Has the government looked into Ms Vivian Alvarez this specific case or indeed made any at- Senator FAULKNER (2.26 pm)—My tempts to investigate the substance behind question is directed to the Minister for Im- the claims made by Mr Chen? migration and Multicultural and Indigenous Senator ELLISON—I can confirm that Affairs, Senator Vanstone. Does the minister the relevant authorities have made arrange- recall that, after many hours of questioning ments with both individuals, Mr Chen and in Senate estimates, the Australian public Mr Hao, to obtain information regarding the was told, finally, that it was the minister’s allegations that they have made. Those are chief of staff who issued the directive not to security related matters and of course I am go public with the fact that Ms Alvarez— not going to discuss them in public. But I can then registered as a missing person—had say that those arrangements have been put in been deported to the Philippines? Why did place and the opportunity has been provided the minister’s office decide on a cover-up to both individuals to provide any informa- about the fact that Vivian Alvarez, an Austra- tion they wish to provide. Certainly, it would lian citizen, had been deported? Why was be naive to think that these allegations are this decision to cover up taken by the minis- not being looked at closely by the relevant ter’s chief of staff? Does the minister accept authorities. I cannot comment further in rela- responsibility for the actions of her chief of tion to the specific incidents referred to by staff? Is it not the case that it was the media Senator Stott Despoja, for obvious reasons. It who found Ms Alvarez and that no-one else is security related. could because the department and the minis- Senator STOTT DESPOJA—Mr Presi- ter covered the matter up? dent, I ask a supplementary question. I ask Senator VANSTONE—In relation to the minister if he could confirm whether the whether I have confidence in and take re- government is aware of the case of Mr Lan sponsibility for what my chief of staff does, Fu and whether he has been executed. He has yes—absolutely. I have worked with him for been sentenced to death. I would like to the entire time we have been in government. know whether he has been killed. Is the gov- Secondly, has there been an attempt to have a ernment aware of that case? Does it know cover-up in relation to this matter? Hardly; what has happened to this man? Generally that is simply not the case. What was made speaking, does the government have any clear was that one of Ms Alvarez’s previous comment on whether there is substance to partners had contacted the office and had the allegations that Mr Chen and others have asked that there be as little publicity on this put forward? as possible. Senator ELLISON—I think the best Senator Conroy—So what? thing I can do is take on board the question Senator VANSTONE—I acknowledge put by Senator Stott Despoja. If there is any- the interjection ‘So what?’ thing further I can advise the Senate I will do so, but that of course will be within the pa- Senator Conroy—What about the fam- rameters of what is an operationally sensitive ily? area and one which relates to security related Senator Ludwig interjecting—

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 29

The PRESIDENT—Order! Senator government has provided Mr Feleno Solon Jr Ludwig and Senator Conroy, come to order. a visitor visa, valid for three months, to en- Senator VANSTONE—This gentleman is able him to accompany his sister and to as- the father of one of Ms Alvarez’s children, sist with her settlement. Mr Solon will be who at that point was not in a position, in offered a reasonable allowance to cover his any way, to benefit from the media scram- costs while in Australia. bling all over their lives. That was the re- Asylum Seekers quest that was passed on to the department, Senator HARRADINE (2.30 pm)—I and I think it was quite appropriate. want to ask a question about a matter that has Senator Conroy interjecting— been of concern to me for the last 30 years, Senator Chris Evans interjecting— and it is to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, Sena- The PRESIDENT—Order! Senator Ev- tor Vanstone. Is it a fact that there are now ans and Senator Conroy, shouting across the four Chinese dissidents reported to be seek- chamber is disorderly. ing asylum in Australia? How many other Senator FAULKNER—Mr President, I dissidents is the government aware of who ask a supplementary question. I ask the min- are seeking asylum in Australia? How will ister why Ms Alvarez is still waiting to come the government assist them to escape perse- home. Is it not the case, Minister, that the cution in China, or does the government be- main impediment to bringing Ms Alvarez lieve the words uttered by the Chinese am- home is in fact the Howard government’s bassador that no harm will come to these inability to adequately and responsibly deal people? How will the government ensure with Ms Alvarez’s medical and accommoda- that no other dissidents will be betrayed to tion needs? the Chinese government? Senator VANSTONE—Senator, you will Senator VANSTONE—Senator Harrad- be aware that the Australian government has ine, I will answer your question as best I offered an appropriate settlement package, possibly can without going into the detail of including assistance with accommodation, the caseload. You would understand—albeit I medical and rehab needs, as well as income do not think the opposition do, and I cer- support—all to be managed by a case coor- tainly do not think the media do—that it is dinator. Ms Alvarez requested our embassy simply not appropriate when someone has in Manila to cancel her flight to Australia made a request for protection for all the de- until further notice. A senior Centrelink tails of that to be bandied about publicly. caseworker is already in Manila ready to There are very good reasons for that. None- accompany Ms Alvarez on her return to Aus- theless, I can give you some general advice tralia. that you might find helpful. Senator Patterson—And has been there DIMIA receive about 3,000 applications for some time. for protection visas every year from a range Senator VANSTONE—And has been of nationalities. It is not new to receive pro- there for some time, as Senator Patterson tection visa applications from PRC nationals. reminds me. The government will be provid- We might have 700, 900 or 1,000 in any one ing support to Ms Alvarez, and it is up to her year. So, quite the opposite to the media whether she chooses to seek compensation. drama of this being particularly unusual, we In order to facilitate Ms Alvarez’s return, the have quite a lot of protection claims from

CHAMBER 30 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

China. Every protection visa is assessed on June 2005, at which some 100 staff were in its individual merits and takes into account attendance? Can the minister confirm that up-to-date country information. On the ad- the following advice was given by Ms vice I have, about five or six per cent of the Stanley, the Queensland state manager, at applications are successful in the end, and by that meeting? She advised: (1) to ignore the that I mean taking primary and review deci- existing legislation as it is too slow to sions into account. What I am trying to con- change; (2) policy is being rewritten as fast vey is that the government does not accept as it can but in the meantime, even though the proposition that everyone who applies for we can legally refuse a visa, we should now protection should get it; nor does it take the ask ourselves to consider if it is the right de- proposition that everyone who applies should cision; (3) the staff were invited to imagine not get it. Each case is dealt with—as it that they are Amanda and the client is Kerry ought to be—individually on its merits. O’Brien, and Kerry is concerned not about Senator HARRADINE—Mr President, I the law but only about the rightness of the ask a supplementary question. Minister, I am decision; and (4) to prioritise handling of not referring to the requests on economic cases according to media potential. Did the grounds; I am referring to the requests for minister herself authorise the issue of any political asylum or for asylum due to the vio- such or similar directives to DIMIA staff to lation of human rights. ignore their own legislation or did the au- thorisation come from her office? Senator VANSTONE—Senator Harrad- ine, I understood that you were not referring Senator VANSTONE—Senator Ludwig, to ones that were specifically economic; nei- thank you for the question. I am simply not ther was I. The figures I gave you relate to aware of the briefing to which you refer, but general applications for refugee protection I will make inquiries. visas. I certainly do not have at this point Senator Conroy interjecting— available to me a breakdown within each The PRESIDENT—We can do without country—or, for that matter, across the the interjection, Senator Conroy. Your col- board—as to the basis of each claim. Each league is trying to ask a supplementary ques- claim is considered individually. I do not tion. have summary information—it may be avail- Senator LUDWIG—Mr President, I ask able, but I certainly do not have it at this a supplementary question. Can the minister point—as to the types of claims that are confirm if a cultural problem still exists made. It is a regrettable development in im- within her department? Does the minister migration law that there are people who put condone directives to decision-making offi- in a protection visa claim for the purpose of cers in her department which require prioriti- staying in Australia longer, while their claim sation according to their potential for adverse is heard. media comment on the department and on Immigration the minister? Can the minister clarify for the Senator LUDWIG (2.34 pm)—My ques- Australian public if the law applies to tion is to Senator Vanstone, the Minister for DIMIA or does DIMIA pick and choose Immigration and Multicultural and Indige- which ones it wants to obey according to nous Affairs. Is the minister aware of a potential media interest? branch briefing by senior Immigration offi- Senator VANSTONE—Senator Ludwig, cial Karen Stanley held in Brisbane on 8 I have indicated to you that I have no know-

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 31 ledge whatsoever of this briefing. I certainly Labor. This gives a very big rise in real dis- do not condone what I think you were alleg- posable income for Australians. A single per- ing this person said—namely, that it is to son on average weekly earnings will have consider not so much the law but the right- received a 21 per cent improvement in real ness of it. I cannot do any more than to tell disposable income in the 10 years from 1996 you that I will make inquiries about this al- to 1997. That sort of rise in real disposable leged meeting and what was allegedly said, income applies right through the income- and I will do so. earning profile of ordinary Australians. Taxation Those figures do take into account the tax Senator FIFIELD (2.37 pm)—My ques- cuts that we announced in the 2005-06 tion is to the Minister for Finance and Ad- budget. The tax cuts we announced in the ministration and Minister representing the 2005-06 budget will be delivered. But, of Treasurer, Senator Minchin. Will the minister course, despite the inevitability of those tax advise the Senate what the Howard govern- cuts coming into effect, the Labor Party have ment is doing to lower the burden of per- spent the last five weeks since the budget sonal income tax for all Australians? For the creating total and utter confusion not only benefit of hardworking taxpayers and busi- amongst themselves, of course, but also nesses, will the minister advise if there are amongst ordinary Australians and for Austra- any obstacles to the implementation of these lian businesses, which do not know what sort much-needed changes? of tax they should deduct from their workers’ incomes on 1 July. It has prevented the tax Senator MINCHIN—I thank Senator commissioner from sending out the sched- Fifield for that good question on tax and I ules to employers. So 850,000 Australian acknowledge his very keen interest in lower- businesses have been in a state of total con- ing the tax burden on ordinary Australians. It fusion—like the Labor Party’s state of con- is good to get a question on tax. We thought fusion—about how much tax they deduct on that Labor were coming in here breathing 1 July. fire and brimstone to talk about tax and to make that the big issue of the week. We have Mr Beazley has been all over the place. had five Labor questions today and not one He has refused to tell us what his position is mention of income tax. It shows how impor- on the tax schedules. He will not say any- tant that issue is to the Labor Party. thing about his position until the legislation is debated. Everybody knows that this is a Unlike Labor, we are very keen on lower- completely absurd position. The press gallery ing the tax burden on all Australians. Since knows it, the Labor Party know it and all the year 2000 we have announced four in- Australians know it. It is apparently all right stalments of personal income tax cuts for for other senators in this place to state a posi- Australians. The effect of these cuts has been tion on the schedules, but it is apparently not to reduce the tax paid by Australians on in- all right for the Labor Party. We have seen comes of $10,000 by 53 per cent, of $20,000 statements from Senator Harris and from the by 33 per cent, of $40,000 by 20 per cent, of Australian Greens, and today we have had a $50,000 by 23 per cent and of $80,000 by 25 position from the Australian Democrats, per cent. They are substantial cuts and they making it clear and making a decision that are skewed to those on low incomes. Those they will not vote to disallow these tax cuts are complemented by the rise in real schedules. But apparently not the Labor wages under this government, unlike under Party—they are resolutely irresolute on the

CHAMBER 32 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 question of what to do about the tax sched- its recommendations, saying in the minister’s ules. They cannot make up their minds. They press release of 13 May 2004: have agonised for weeks and weeks, not The government rejects the major findings and knowing what to do. Around this place, it is recommendations contained in this report. known as the cock-up in the lock-up. After Senator VANSTONE—I thank the sena- that cock-up, the Labor Party have been re- tor for the question. Senator, you will be duced to total irrelevance on this question. aware that, under the previous government, Five weeks of bluster and bluff from Mr there were hundreds and hundreds of chil- Beazley and five weeks of uncertainty for dren in detention centres. Under the previous employers have amounted to absolutely government, as you will be aware, there were nothing. Their farcical position on this issue no residential housing projects. This gov- just shows how unfit the Labor Party are to ernment take the view that it is not anywhere govern. This is one of the all-time great own near ideal and we do not want to see children goals in the history of Australian politics. in detention. It is one of the last things we The Labor Party know that they are entitled would like to see. But we do not want to to announce a different position. They could separate children from parents and equally have announced that on budget night and we do not want to say to families that, if they then got out of the way and let ordinary Aus- come with children, they will be out scot- tralians have their tax cuts, which they will free. So there is a difficult balance to be now get on 1 July. found. It is a very difficult balance. I do not Immigration think it is appropriate to release children into some sort of care without their parents. Senator FORSHAW (2.41 pm)—My question is directed to Senator Vanstone, the What the government have done has been Minister for Immigration and Multicultural to work quite assiduously at providing a and Indigenous Affairs. My question again midway mark—that is, the housing project concerns the allegations aired last night by and other forms of alternative detention the DIMIA whistleblower. Given the revela- where there are families with children. We tions last night that the department knew in have consistently done that. As a matter of 2002 that mental health was an issue, is the fact, we have at the moment 23 children in minister familiar with the recommendations alternative detention arrangements. That of the HREOC inquiry of 1999-2002? In would be in the housing project or in com- particular, it says: munity based alternative detention arrange- Children in immigration detention for long peri- ments, including foster care. There are six ods of time are at high risk of serious mental kids on Christmas Island and 29 in the harm. The Commonwealth’s failure to implement mainland immigration detention centres. Of the repeated recommendations by mental health those 29, 27 were detained as a consequence professionals that certain children be removed of compliance action and are therefore not from the detention environment with their par- expected to be there as long as others would ents, amounted to cruel, inhumane and degrading be. Two were unauthorised air arrivals. There treatment of those children in detention ... are no unaccompanied minors in Australian In the light of the statement by ‘Jamie’ about immigration detention centres, which is a DIMIA’s knowledge of the significant mental record that Labor cannot say they were ever health issues in 2002, how can it be that the able to achieve. Howard government rejected this report and

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 33

Having said that, we are always looking to night. I assumed he was here for all of ques- find better ways to do things, and one of tion time and had heard me say that I would those is to maintain the very strong border look at those, but that what I had seen at this protection policies that we implemented. We point, prior to question time, was pretty gen- had thousands of people coming unan- eralised complaints. They are very hard, of nounced. For example, in the first three course, to disprove, so they are easy allega- weeks of August 2001 we had over 1,000 tions to make. people arrive—1,200 people in the first three But let make this clear. There have been weeks of August 2001. We are very proud of disagreements about mental health issues; the fact that we stopped those boats com- there is no doubt about that. But I will not ing—very proud—and we are not backing allow the proposition to be put that the de- down on those policies at all. But we are partment or the government has not cared constantly looking for ways to soften the about mental health issues. We have had dif- individual impact and we will continue to do ferences of opinion about them. That is what that. has happened. The senator puts a proposition As to the mental health aspects, this issue that because the government does not agree got some coverage over the estimates period. with one argument that is put that therefore it I refer you to the, I think, opening statement does not care. That is simply not a useful or made by Mr Palmer, and to some of the tran- correct proposition to put. script of the estimates Hansard, where you Telstra will see some changes that are already under Senator CHERRY (2.47 pm)—My ques- way, which I presume you would welcome. tion is to the Minister for Communications, Senator FORSHAW—Mr President, I Information Technology and the Arts, Sena- ask a supplementary question. I thank the tor Coonan. Telstra’s new CEO, Solomon minister for her answer and acknowledge Trujillo is reported today as saying he will that she did finally get to the essential part of take an aggressive stance against increased the question regarding mental health. But the regulation, and that competition was not the question went to the statements made last answer to meet the needs of end users. Does night. My supplementary question is this: the minister agree with Mr Trujillo’s assess- how is it that the minister’s department could ment, particularly given that phone costs are have known that this was an issue of concern much lower in the US, where there is more back in 2002, as is evidenced by the HREOC competition and a regulator with a lot more report, and yet the then minister publicly teeth than in Australia? Will his comments denied that mental health problems were deter the government from tightening the widespread among the detainee population? regulatory regime and promoting more com- Is not the real problem here that the govern- petition? Was the minister or Minister ment’s attitude, as evidenced by the then Minchin, on behalf of the majority share- minister’s comment on the HREOC report, is holder, the Australian public, consulted prior one of sheer arrogance and denial? Why is it to Mr Trujillo’s appointment and made aware that the children still continue to suffer and of his views? be exposed to serious risk of mental health Senator COONAN—Thank you to Sena- problems developing? tor Cherry for what will probably be your Senator VANSTONE—The senator did last question—I will miss you. The answer is ask me about some allegations made last that of course the government was consulted

CHAMBER 34 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 on the appointment of Mr Trujillo. It would whether they are talking about full structural not be appropriate to discuss entirely the separation, functional separation or opera- substance of what the communications were, tional separation. Mr Trujillo would under- but obviously there is an obligation under the stand very well the critical difference with act to consult the shareholder ministers, and full structural separation. That is what he has we were so consulted. resisted and, in fact, he has suggested and As to Mr Trujillo’s views, I can say that asserted that that could hardly be in Telstra’s the government has welcomed the appoint- interests. So, in the context of those com- ment of such an outstanding CEO as Mr ments—admittedly we have not yet had an Trujillo to take the helm of Telstra, at a time opportunity to really thrash these matters out when the government is considering whether with Mr Trujillo—I do not see that there is or not to proceed with the sale of the remain- any great distance between his view of what der of the government’s interest in Telstra. is necessary for a competitive regime and the As we have said, we will do so subject to way in which the government would see it as conditions which include the adequacy of appropriate to conduct the review on compe- services in rural and regional Australia, value tition regulation and to get the very best tele- for taxpayers and, of course, legislation pass- communication environment for Australia ing the Senate giving the authority to so pro- going forward. ceed. As Senator Cherry would be aware, as Senator CHERRY—Mr President, I ask part of the government considering the regu- a supplementary question. The minister latory environment that ought to accompany would be aware of growing opposition to the the telecommunications industry more privatisation of Telstra among the various broadly—whether or not Telstra is sold—we members of the National Farmers Federation have instigated a paper, an inquiry and a re- and in particular with its new report card view into the regulatory environment and released today and its campaign for the New what adjustments may be necessary to ensure South Wales Farmers Association. Given Mr that there is competition and adequate incen- Trujillo told the ABC’s Insiders program that tives for investment going forward. he probably would not have joined Telstra if So the government’s position on competi- the privatisation was not— tion is clear. We have in place a process to Government senators interjecting— get the review organised. We think that com- The PRESIDENT—Order! Senators on petition is important, and the chairman of my right! Telstra has the same view that it is appropri- Senator CHERRY—I will start the ques- ate that there be some transparency between tion again. Given Mr Trujillo told the ABC’s Telstra’s retail and wholesale operations. Insiders program that he probably would not That is a matter of agreement. So far as I have joined Telstra if the privatisation was have been able to tell from Mr Trujillo’s not on the cards, if he does not get his way comments, there is certainly nothing at odds on privatisation how much will Telstra, par- with the government’s position on the com- ticularly its majority shareholders the Austra- petitive environment relating to Telstra and, lian public, be paying out to him on top of indeed, to other competitors. There certainly the reported $10 million annual pay package seems to have been, in what has been put to and his million-dollar sign-up fee? Mr Trujillo in some of the interviews that I have seen, some confusion on the part of Senator COONAN—I am not quite sure those who put questions to him about what Senator Cherry is getting at in this sup-

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 35 plementary question, because it is entirely a great thing about it is that there will be pro- matter of speculation as to whether Mr ceeds. Instead of having some $30 billion Trujillo will be happy, not happy or indeed tied up in a telephone company, there will be indifferent about the way in which the gov- proceeds which can be better deployed and ernment considers whether or not to proceed put to better use for the Australian people. with the full sale of Telstra. It is an entirely We have said that we will establish a Future speculative question, but let me say that the Fund to ensure that we can, as a government government has always been very clear. Our and as a people, ensure that the unfunded policy has been clear for a number of years superannuation liabilities, which this gov- that, subject to all the conditions being met ernment has inherited after 100 years of pub- that the government has articulated consis- lic sector employment, can be met from that tently—certainly since I have been in the Future Fund. portfolio it has been consistently said—the We have indicated a disposition to have government would consider whether or not the proceeds of the Telstra sale go into the to proceed with the full sale of Telstra. I do Future Fund. I think the Treasurer on budget not think I need to repeat them again, be- night did not indicate his personal view that cause I elucidated them in my initial answer the Telstra proceeds should all go into the to Senator Cherry. So in those circumstances Future Fund. The government has not as yet it is entirely speculative, and I am not going made any formal decision on that matter, to engage in speculation. (Time expired) because as yet there are no proceeds. The Telstra Labor Party should finally get mugged by Senator CONROY (2.54 pm)—My ques- reality, accept the reality that the government tion is to Senator Minchin, the Minister for should not continue to own over 50 per cent Finance and Administration. Can the minis- of Australia’s major corporation and that it is ter update the Senate on the government’s ridiculous for the government to have some policy regarding the proceeds of any sale of $30 billion tied up in a telephone company— Telstra? Do the Treasurer’s comments at the Senator Conroy interjecting— time of the federal budget, that the govern- The PRESIDENT—Senator, you have ment’s object is for the full proceeds of the asked your question. Telstra sale to go into the Future Fund, still Senator MINCHIN—For all the bluster represent government policy? about the Labor Party being committed to Senator MINCHIN—I thank Senator economic reform and setting Australia up for Conroy for his question and note again that it the 21st century, it should abandon its social- is not about tax at all. All the fire and brim- ist objective and recognise that the govern- stone about tax has withered away. I am ment should not own half of Australia’s ma- happy to answer this question again. jor corporation. This is an idiotic position Senator Chris Evans—We follow the which most left-wing governments around standing orders. The President doesn’t, but the world have abandoned and which we we do. want to abandon. We hope the Senate will in The PRESIDENT—Are you reflecting due course give the government the authority on the chair, Senator? I hope not. You cannot to proceed with the sale. When we have that ask about the bill, but you can talk about tax. legislative authority we will then make a decision as to whether the circumstances are Senator MINCHIN—If we do have the right for us to proceed to a sale. Once we opportunity to implement our policy, the

CHAMBER 36 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 have a sale and sale proceeds we will then ing a sustainable forest industry in this coun- make a formal decision about the direction in try which provides employment opportuni- which those proceeds should go. It is cer- ties, in particular in rural and regional Aus- tainly our disposition that the proceeds tralia? should go to the Future Fund. Senator IAN MACDONALD—I thank Senator Conroy interjecting— Senator Barnett very much for that question. The PRESIDENT—Is that a supplemen- Since the Senate last met we have launched tary question or an interjection? the Tasmanian Community Forest Agree- ment. Senator Barnett and his Liberal col- Senator CONROY—Question, thank leagues from Tasmania were instrumental in you, Mr President. getting that very good outcome for the Tas- The PRESIDENT—It is very hard to tell manian people and for the Tasmanian envi- the difference, Senator. ronment. Senator CONROY—Is the minister That program will achieve sustainable aware of comments on the weekend from forestry and it will support jobs and workers Senator elect Barnaby Joyce that at least $5 in country communities. The $250 million billion of the proceeds of the sale should be package will provide for a total of one mil- allocated for regional development? Can the lion hectares in old-growth forest reserves. minister assure the chamber that no money That is 100 million trees in reserves in Tas- from any sale of Telstra will be wasted on mania. That puts the lie on the campaign of National Party pork-barrelling? Will the min- the Greens which suggests that there are only ister tell Mr Joyce and the National Party a few old-growth trees left—there will be today that the government will not be buying 100 million trees reserved in Tasmania. The their votes with Australian taxpayers’ dol- package also provides money for upgrading lars? mills and ensuring that workers in Tasmania Senator MINCHIN—The Labor Party of do have jobs into the future. Those jobs will Australia are experts on pork-barrelling. We be throughout the whole of the state of Tas- had 13 years of it from the Labor Party. They mania and really do demonstrate that the certainly know all about pork-barrelling. Howard government is interested in workers’ This government has a very proud record of jobs. directing resources to the national interest, I know Senator Barnett was interested in which I assure you we will do with the pro- any possible alternative policies that might ceeds of Telstra. be around. I am pleased to say that the oppo- Opposition senators interjecting— sition leader, Mr Beazley, has dumped the The PRESIDENT—Order! Senators on policy of his predecessor Mr Latham and has my left will come to order. Question time has supported the Howard government’s pro- been reasonably quiet today, but I am not gram in Tasmania. Of course, Mr Beazley going to put up with that racket on my left. flip-flops so much you do not know what his policy is likely to be next week, but at least Forestry today he does support it. Senator BARNETT (2.59 pm)—My I am aware that other Labor leaders do not question is to the Minister for Fisheries, For- share the Howard government’s interest in estry and Conservation, Senator Ian Mac- workers’ jobs. For example, in my own home donald. Will the minister advise the Senate state of Queensland the Labor premier, Mr on the progress being made towards achiev-

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 37

Beattie, is in the process of shutting down That the Senate take note of the answers given the western hardwood industry at a cost of by the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural some 300 unionists’ jobs. To overcome that and Indigenous Affairs (Senator Vanstone) to he has promised to create 50 new jobs in the questions without notice asked today relating to Queensland Environmental Protection immigration. Agency to make up for the 300 unionists While the government seems to have the who will be sacked as a result of his forest view that there is no issue here, all Austra- policies in Queensland. In New South Wales, lians are concerned about the administration the Labor premier is shutting down the for- of the immigration department and the min- estry industry in the Brigalow region, which ister’s performance. Today was another ex- will cost 472 jobs. In Victoria, the Labor ample of the minister not being on top of premier, Mr Bracks, is shutting down pro- what is going on in her own department, un- duction forests and causing problems with able to provide answers to the most basic jobs. questions about a Chinese citizen, Mr Chen, who sought political or territorial asylum in I expect the Greens have different poli- this country. cies. They understand that as the Howard government attends to all of these significant The minister was unable to offer us any environmental problems their backing and information, despite four or five questions on the cash that supports them will fade away. these issues, other than to refer us to a week- They unsuccessfully try to create issues arti- old press release put out by her department. ficially, but they realise now that the Howard That is the extent of her grasp—that is the government is the real government of the extent of her knowledge of these matters and environment. the extent to which she has informed herself about Mr Chen’s plight. The best she can do Finally, I suggest to the Labor senators is read a week-old press release from the that they might warn their state colleagues department in which it seeks to defend itself about abandoning workers. Mr Latham against accusations he has made about his abandoned the workers in Tasmania and look treatment. what happened to him. The Labor senators would be doing the state premiers a favour if It is not good enough. It was not good they reminded the state premiers of what enough for Ms Rau, it was not good enough happens to a Labor party when it rejects the for Ms Alvarez-Solon and it is certainly not workers of the nation and disregards entirely good enough for Mr Chen. This is a minister the jobs and the communities that depend who has totally lost control of her portfolio upon those jobs in country Australia. and a department that seems to have no idea of what the right thing to do is. We have had Senator Hill—Mr President, I ask that no explanation today—no detail and no an- further questions be placed on the Notice Paper. swers to the legitimate questions about why a person in fear of his life and the life of his QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: family was not granted political asylum and TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS was not assisted. Immigration Instead, what we got was an explanation Senator CHRIS EVANS (Western Aus- which beggared belief. The explanation was, tralia—Leader of the Opposition in the Sen- ‘Mr Chen did come into the DIMIA office. ate) (3.03 pm)—I move: He did come in to have a chat with us. We didn’t know why he was there, but we rang

CHAMBER 38 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 up the Chinese consulate and discussed who Mr Downer tried to say he didn’t fill in the he was with them.’ Mr Chen has produced a proper form. What we now know is that letter which is headed, ‘Seeking political there is no form. asylum in Australia.’ We know he gave that What he did was to seek protection and to DIMIA at some stage, but DIMIA and the asylum from persecution and this govern- minister would have us believe that they did ment ignored him and tried to fob him off. not know why this chap popped in. He They rang the Chinese consulate. That is not popped in, he introduced himself and what good enough, and the minister’s explanation do they do? Give the Chinese consulate a today was not good enough. Something is call and have a chat about him! DIMIA did deeply wrong inside that department and not know why he was there but they gave the something is deeply wrong with her admini- Chinese consulate a call. This is a man who stration of that department. Mr Chen’s case is seeking political asylum because he fears is just another example. I understand that in for his life. We hear from Mr Chen in fact the other place today Mr Downer admitted to that within minutes he received a call on his a conversation with the Chinese ambassador mobile, while still in the immigration de- about Mr Chen’s case. This will come out; partment’s offices. we will get to the bottom of this. This gov- What is the explanation for this? None. ernment is arrogantly refusing to answer What answers can the minister provide? questions about how they have dealt with None. The minister was asked whether or not this man, a man who was in fear of his life DIMIA were in fact in breach of the Migra- and the life of his family. It is not good tion Act, which provides protection for peo- enough. It is not good enough for the minis- ple seeking political asylum—section 336F ter to come in and try to close the asking of of the Migration Act prohibits disclosure of questions by simply referring to a week-old information identifying an applicant to the press release from her department. She has to foreign government from whom protection is be more accountable to this parliament. sought. It is pretty straightforward: if you are There was no accountability today. What looking to get political asylum, the Migration we are seeing is arrogance creeping into this Act says you have got certain protections. government. They are not prepared to pro- But what does DIMIA do? On the face of it, vide details as to why this man was fobbed it rings up the Chinese consulate and says, off or why this man had DIMIA ring the con- ‘We’ve got this bloke here. Is he really one sulate and effectively alert them to the fact of yours?’ that he was seeking asylum. These are seri- Senator Santoro—That’s not what hap- ous issues that go to someone’s liberty and pened. life. They are serious issues that deserve an- Senator CHRIS EVANS—That is what swers. Whether Mr Chen’s story is 100 per he says happened; that is what the minister cent right, I do not know. But what we know said happened today: ‘We didn’t know why from the minister today is that she is unable he was there but we just gave them a call and to provide an alternative version. She did not mentioned that this bloke was here.’ Mr come clean. She read a week-old press re- Downer, when asked, said, ‘He didn’t really lease. That is not good enough. (Time ex- formally apply for political asylum; he didn’t pired) fill in the form.’ There is no form. He pro- Senator SANTORO (Queensland) (3.08 duced a letter seeking political asylum and pm)—It is not coincidental that we are par-

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 39 ticipating in this take note debate at the end The minister said today that if any officer of question time while at the same time we in within the department had any specific issues this place and those in the other place are of concern, or still has specific issues of con- debating the merit of the government’s Tax cern that they would like to make known, she Laws Amendment (Personal Income Tax is always available to see them and listen to Reduction) Bill 2005. This take note debate them. We know that. Members opposite, in- today is a political debate, as have been all cluding the leader of the Labor Party in this the other debates initiated in this place on place, certainly know that. Anonymous this issue by senators opposite. This debate, claims, as the minister said, are obviously like all the other debates, is about getting the open to interpretation. Claims should not be minister. The opposition is obsessively pur- made anonymously, particularly when the suing a witch-hunt against a minister who minister’s door is open. fulfils her responsibilities in a diligent and Having said this, Australia’s asylum proc- effective manner. esses are world class. Claims of bias against This is a debate that seeks to divert atten- unauthorised arrivals just do not stand up to tion away from Labor’s dismal policy and even the most superficial scrutiny. It should leadership failures in the vital area of taxa- be noted—and I know that all reasonable tion, and to particularly divert attention away Australians will note this—that of the 10,000 from the government’s reduction of the taxes unauthorised boat arrivals seeking protection that are levied on all Australians. That is since 1999, almost 80 per cent have been what this debate is all about, as was the simi- granted protection in the first instance by the lar debate a week or two ago. The main rea- minister’s department. Given this record, it is son why we are having this debate today is to hard to see how claims of bias stand up. I divert attention from the Labor Party’s respectfully suggest to honourable senators shameless and ignorant attitude and position opposite that it is a matter for praise not in relation to the government’s tax cuts. Aus- criticism that the department was able to tralians are not fooled by debates such as cope with the sheer number of unauthorised this. boat arrivals between 1999 and 2001. Today the opposition raised several issues In relation to the handling of the asylum relating to Minister Vanstone’s administra- claim by the Chinese national, the minister tion of her department, including, among has also made several very relevant points others, claims by a current Immigration offi- which again senators opposite seek to ignore. cer on Lateline on Monday, 13 June 2005 But it is worth again going on the record and the handling of an asylum claim of a very clearly and very precisely with what Chinese national. We just heard the leader of happened. This person’s visa application is the Labor Party in this place talk about the being processed on its merits in the normal minister not providing answers to questions manner, although I stress here that it has pri- asked of her. I listened very carefully to what ority. The circumstances demand that it be the minister had to say in here today and, in handled as a priority. Mr Chen was provided relation to the claims made by a current Im- with a briefing on his visa options before he migration officer on Lateline last night, there lodged a protection visa application with the were several salient points which can and department on Friday, 3 June 2005. That is a should be made and which obviously the matter of public record. He was contacted by leader of the Labor Party in this place missed DIMIA early in the following week and of- taking note of. fered the opportunity for a protection visa

CHAMBER 40 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 interview to be held later that week. At his come forward to the Palmer inquiry. People request—and I stress that this was at his re- are concerned about the way that they may quest—this interview has been rescheduled be treated as a consequence of putting their for a date acceptable to him, as he and his hand up and saying, ‘I’ve got information representative wanted more time to prepare that may assist. I’ve got information that his case. That again is a matter of public re- may expose how the department of immigra- cord which honourable senators opposite tion actually works’—not how it should seek to ignore. work or could work. Instead, we have peo- Much has been made of the minister’s ref- ple—and I suspect that there are more than erence to the media release. But it is a matter simply the person on Lateline last night— of public record that the department issued a who are too concerned, too afraid to demon- press release making it clear that contact strate who they are and what the actual is- with the PRC consulate was short and that it sues are because of the retribution that may only confirmed that the person in question be visited upon them. That is a culture within worked with the consulate. It did not disclose the department administered by the minister. any information about that person’s where- It is not a culture that has just grown up abouts or intentions. Again, honourable sena- without both former Minister Ruddock and tors opposite ignore that. His position and his now Minister Vanstone having anything to status were in no way compromised. The fact do with it. They are not in a position to be that he was seeking protection was not able to divorce themselves from the truth. known to the department at the time, so how The truth is that the department of immigra- could they pass on any information to that tion has gone downhill under their control effect? (Time expired) and under their watch and something needs to be done—not something such as the Senator LUDWIG (Queensland) (3.13 Palmer inquiry, where Mr Palmer, for all his pm)—What we have heard today from Sena- good intentions, is going to leave after the tor Vanstone only confirms for the opposition Rau case, as we understand it. We then find that the department and the minister respon- that Mr Comrie is going to take up the cudg- sible for it should discontinue the view that els in relation to some 200 other cases that the Palmer inquiry is a fix-all. It is not. It is might need to be investigated, including the not going to produce the results. The minister case of Ms Solon. continues to hide behind the fact that the Palmer inquiry will provide an answer to all We need the minister to come into the of the woes that currently beset the Depart- chamber, to cut through all of this and to ment of Immigration and Multicultural and indicate that a royal commission is the only Indigenous Affairs. Yet all we have had from way that these issues will be dealt with, and the case of Rau onwards is mistake after mis- dealt with in a serious and profound manner take. These mistakes even go to areas which once and for all. Otherwise what we will face hitherto we would not have considered. We is this issue continuing to bubble through and look at the Chen matter and we find another other people coming forward and saying, ‘I episode of DIMIA bungling administered by was a bit concerned about making this the minister. known during the Palmer inquiry and I have more to add.’ Today Gerard Henderson, for- More information entered the public arena mer chief of staff to John Howard, had this to through ‘Jamie’ on Lateline last night, when say: it came to light that people are not going to

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 41

It is one matter for department officers to be job and he is going to introduce his bill today given such powers of assessment, detention and as well. (Time expired) deportation— Senator SANDY MACDONALD (New and, as an aside, very serious powers. Mr South Wales) (3.18 pm)—The government Henderson continued: and Minister Vanstone have responded It is quite another matter when it is accepted by promptly and appropriately to the request of the minister that the same officers have a cultural Mr Chen, the Chinese national, for safety problem with the way in which they handle asy- and protection. Mr Chen’s protection visa lum and migration issues. application was lodged, I understand, on 3 The deauthorised department cannot be reformed June. I also understand that it is being treated without radical and all embracing change. In the as a priority. Mr Chen has been contacted meantime, victims of its deficient culture should concerning his application and he has de- have their cases reviewed by someone not in the need of “cultural change”. ferred the interview so that he and his advis- ers can further prepare for it. The govern- That means that a royal commission is the ment will follow normal processes in deter- only way that we are going to be presented mining his status. Above all, he will be given with what actually happened, how it hap- a full and fair hearing. Mr Chen’s supporters pened, what happened and when it happened, also want Australia to provide him with terri- and not the farce we have at present, torial asylum. Mr Chen is like any other per- whereby Mr Palmer will hand down his full son seeking asylum. It will only be granted if and complete report to the secretary of the he is considered to be at great personal risk. very department that he is inquiring into. We His application for a temporary protection may never know all of the issues that are visa is considered to be the most appropriate ventilated in the report. The minister has not way to respond and to move forward, and given us a guarantee that the report will be that process is in place at the moment. made public. It is a convenient way and it is a sleight of hand means of saying: ‘This is Australia has an enviable record in the what we will do. We will get the report and strength and the administration of its immi- we will consider what we will release. We gration program. Australia will receive about will consider the recommendations.’ It is a 110,000 new Australians under our general filter. That is what the minister has in fact immigration intake in 2004-05 and around said she will do. another 10,000 to 12,000 under our humani- tarian intake. This will include a large num- What we do not know is when the Palmer ber of refugees and others who might qualify inquiry will finalise its report and for how under TPV guidelines. Over one million po- long it will sit on the minister’s desk. Will tential Australian citizens take out papers to she then sit on it until next Friday and release seek immigration to Australia each year. I it at the end of this session of parliament so think it is more than that; it is approaching that we do not have an opportunity of seeing 1.2 million. We are probably the destination it? That is the usual course that this govern- of choice for many tens of millions around ment would take and someone on that side the world who wish to make a better life for should put a stop to it. We already heard that themselves away from their country of birth. Mr Georgiou is not going to put up with it. He has not reached an agreement with the We acknowledge our established respon- Howard government. He thinks the depart- sibilities in this area and have done so con- ment of immigration is still in need of a fix-it sistently since World War II. More than

CHAMBER 42 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 seven million new Australians have made ill person who was improperly detained, de- their way to our shores since that time to spite the fact that DIMIA itself sought to begin a new life for themselves. Included in have him psychiatrically assessed. We have a that number are over 600,000 people who judicial decision saying that DIMIA was re- came here with a status that was based on sponsible for culpable neglect and breached humanitarian grounds. Australia has a non- duty of care in relation to the refusal of psy- discriminatory immigration policy. Above chiatric treatment for two detainees at Bax- all, that policy is about nation building and it ter. Neither detainee had seen a psychiatrist is based on priorities that most Australians for 12 and 21 months respectively. We have feel comfortable with and in fact most Aus- the Chinese defector, Chen Yonglin, whose tralians feel proud of. It is very much part of desire to defect was blown to the Chinese the make-up of our country and the way we embassy by the very DIMIA staff that he had see ourselves and, as a government, we will turned to for help. We have 201 other possi- work very hard to maintain it. ble bungles that are being investigated by Mr The minister has responded to Mr Chen’s Palmer. We have seen Minister Vanstone self-created status in an appropriate way. His forced to backtrack over the fiasco surround- rights will be considered in a proper way, ing East Timorese refugees. We have seen and I understand that he and his family are the minister overruled by Mr Howard when safe. I might finish by saying that continued she tried to send newborn baby Michael An- criticism of DIMIA and the minister is en- drew Tran to Christmas Island with his par- tirely counterproductive and should be seen ents. And, of course, we have a situation for what it is—political opportunism from where Liberal Party backbenchers are in the Labor Party. open revolt over the policies that Minister Vanstone is pursuing and over her admini- Senator FAULKNER (New South stration of the Department of Immigration Wales) (3.22 pm)—I note that the second and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs. speaker in support of Senator Vanstone man- aged to go for just three minutes in defence. It is no wonder that they are in such open That is not a very good effort from you, revolt, because we do have a government Senator Macdonald. I want to say that, in a department that seems to be out of control. It government that is characterised by shoddy is out of control because there is no ministe- ministers and shoddy ministerial perform- rial responsibility or no ministerial hand be- ance, Senator Vanstone takes the cake—not ing applied to deal with the problems. Minis- the birthday cake, of course, but what she ter Vanstone is either unwilling or unable to herself now describes as a ‘sorry cake’. And fix these problems. What is the minister’s what a sorry saga it is. Let us have a look at response to these issues? It is blame shifting. the ministerial record of Senator Vanstone The two people who are responsible for the and her predecessor, Mr Ruddock. situation in which we find ourselves in rela- tion to immigration policy and the admini- We have the case of Cornelia Rau, an Aus- stration of the department of immigration are tralian resident detained. We have the case of Mr Ruddock, the previous minister, and Vivian Alvarez Solon, an Australian citizen Senator Vanstone, the current minister. They deported. We have a situation where an Aus- are the two people who are responsible—Mr tralian citizen of Chinese origin was wrong- Ruddock and Senator Vanstone—and the fully detained because he was not carrying only response from Senator Vanstone is his passport. We have the case of a mentally blame shifting. She always blames the de-

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 43 partment. She never accepts responsibility a number of individual cases—cases where herself, and Mr Ruddock never accepts re- application has been made for asylum—are sponsibility for his appalling administration. worth supporting, and they should be heard And do you know who the sacrificial lamb is on that issue. I also asked a question on this going to be, Mr Deputy President Hogg? I in the parliament today. In particular, I was will tell you. The sacrificial lamb will be Mr curious to know what moves the government Bill Farmer, the secretary of the department had made in terms of looking into the issue of immigration—and if you did not know it of the Lan Fu kidnapping. Given that the before the weekend, you certainly know it case is a few years old, I would have thought now, because he has already been rewarded that the Minister for Justice and Customs with an Order of Australia. Yes, the writing is would have had a little more to report today, on the wall for Mr Farmer. He is a goner. He but he did not. is getting the blame. The end is nigh for Mr In relation to ASIO or any other govern- Farmer. (Time expired) ment agency’s investigation into the sub- Senator STOTT DESPOJA (South Aus- stance or otherwise of the claims that have tralia) (3.27 pm)—I agree with and support been made by Mr Chen, again, there has the Labor Party in taking note of the broad been a lack of information provided to the issues of immigration today. chamber by the minister. When Mr Chen’s Senator Faulkner—Thank you very case first came to light, I said that the first much for that. and foremost priority for our government must be to ensure the safety of Mr Chen and Senator STOTT DESPOJA—I accept his family. Of course, the same must be said Senator Faulkner’s thanks. However, I do of other Chinese defectors who have sought have to put on the record that the Labor asylum in this country. In this respect, the Party’s case in relation to exposing human government’s actions deserve further ques- rights abuses in China, particularly recently, tioning. Although the Minister for Immigra- has been a little less than sparkling. The De- tion and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs mocrats have attempted in the past to draw came out yesterday assuring the public that attention to these issues. However, motions I Mr Chen’s case would be given priority by have tried to move highlighting the issues the department, she has failed to explain to involving Falun Gong practitioners and their the chamber why Mr Hao’s case has received persecution have not been supported by the low priority. I think his application was made Labor Party. Similarly, as I am sure honour- in February. What about the applications able senators would recall, in the lead-up to made by Professor Yuan Hong Bing and his the visits from both President Bush and assistant Zhao Jing? They also remain unre- President Hu, there were motions bringing solved after a year. So it is not just Mr the parliament’s attention to human rights Chen’s case; there are many other cases that abuses in both of those countries. Extraordi- we feel the department and the government narily, the Labor Party supported the motion should come clean about. Given that numer- that exposed US problems but did not sup- ous states, international bodies and human port the motion involving human rights rights organisations around the world have abuses in China. So the Labor Party start condemned human rights abuses— from a pretty low base. Opposition senators interjecting— But, even saying that, in this case the La- bor Party have gone on recording stating that

CHAMBER 44 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Senator STOTT DESPOJA—You can- ciety caused by the sexual assault and abuse of not argue that you want to be taken seriously children and the concealment of these crimes and then talk and laugh through any discus- within churches, government bodies and other sion about human rights abuses in China. institutions. Human rights organisations have condemned Your petitioners ask the Senate, in Parliament to human rights abuses in China. There is wide- call on the Federal Government to initiate a Royal spread evidence of ongoing human rights Commission into the sexual assault and abuse of children in Australia and the ongoing cover-ups of violations currently, so it seems extraordi- these matters. nary to me and to the Democrats that the government should take such a long time to by Senator Bartlett (from seven citizens). establish that these individuals are likely or Live Animal Exports not likely to be persecuted if they return. We To the Honourable the President and Members of need information from the government on the Senate in Parliament assembled: those particular cases. The Petition of the undersigned notes the inade- The Chen case also raises a number of is- quate numbers of livestock available for Austra- sues in relation to application for political lian slaughter, food consumption and hides; the asylum in Australia. Our law does provide increase in Australian abattoir closures; the grow- ing negative economic, employment and social for individuals to seek political asylum in impacts on rural Australia; and the unnecessary Australia. I would assume that Mr Chen’s suffering endured by Australian livestock because circumstances, are the precise circumstances of this nation’s pursuit of trade and financial in which political asylum could reasonably benefits at any cost. Your petitioners call on the be granted. Mr Chen, it has been indicated, members of the Senate to end the live export has been told that it is more appropriate that trade now in favour of developing an Australian he apply for a protection visa. The Minister chilled and frozen halal and kosher carcass trade for Foreign Affairs said there have been only using humane slaughtering practices. two successful claims for asylum under the by Senator Bartlett (from 17 citizens). political asylum category in Australia. Is that Defence: Involvement in Overseas being used as an excuse: the fact that this Conflict Legislation particular category is invoked rarely and To the Honourable the President and Members of therefore it is unlikely that he would be suc- the Senate in Parliament assembled. cessful or that it is inappropriate for him to The Petition of the undersigned calls on the claim under that particular asylum or visa members of the Senate to support the Defence category? Our law allows for it, and he Amendment (Parliamentary Approval for Austra- should be allowed to apply successfully. lian Involvement in Overseas conflict) Bill intro- (Time expired) duced by the Leader of the Australian Democrats, Question agreed to. Senator Andrew Bartlett and the Democrats’ For- eign Affairs spokesperson, Senator Natasha Stott PETITIONS Despoja. The Clerk—Petitions have been lodged Presently, the Prime Minister, through a Cabinet for presentation as follows: decision and the authority of the Defence Act, has Child Abuse the power to send Australian troops to an overseas conflict without the support of the United Na- To the Honourable Members of the Senate in the tions, the Australian Parliament or the Australian Parliament assembled. people. The Petition of the undersigned draws attention to the damaging long-term effects to Australian so-

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 45

The Howard Government has been the first Gov- That the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the ernment in our history to go to war without ma- Australian Crime Commission be authorised to jority Parliament support. It is time to take the hold a public meeting during the sitting of the decision to commit troops to overseas conflict out Senate on Thursday, 23 June 2005, from 9.30 am of the hands of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, to 11 am, to take evidence for the committee’s and place it with the Parliament. inquiry into the trafficking of women for sexual by Senator Bartlett (from nine citizens). servitude. Asylum Seekers Senator Brandis to move on the next day of sitting: To the Honourable the President and the Members of the Senate in Parliament assembled: That the time for the presentation of the report of the Economics Legislation Committee on the Whereas the 1998 Synod of the Anglican Diocese Tax Laws Amendment (2005 Measures No. 1) of Melbourne carried without dissent the follow- Bill 2005 be extended to 21 June 2005. ing motion: Senator Cherry to move on the next day “That this Synod regrets the Government’s adop- tion of procedures for certain people seeking po- of sitting: litical asylum in Australia which exclude them That the Environment, Communications, In- from all public income support while withholding formation Technology and the Arts References permission to work, thereby creating a group of Committee be authorised to hold a public meeting beggars dependent on the Churches and charities during the sitting of the Senate on Monday, for food and the necessities of life; 20 June 2005, from 6.30 pm, to take evidence for and calls upon the Federal government to review the committee’s inquiry into the performance of such procedures immediately and remove all the Australian telecommunications regulatory practices which are manifestly inhumane and in regime. some cases in contravention of our national obli- Senator Bartlett to move on the next day gations as a signatory of the UN Covenant on of sitting: Civil and Political Rights.” That the following bill be introduced: A Bill We, therefore, the individual, undersigned atten- for an Act to promote humane, responsible and dees at St Peter’s Anglican Church, Craigieburn, accountable care, protection and use of domestic VIC, 3064, petition the Senate in support of the animals, livestock, wildlife and animals kept for above mentioned motion. scientific purposes, and the standards required to AND we, as in duty bound will ever pray. achieve this end, and for related purposes. Na- by Senator Carr (from 25 citizens). tional Animal Welfare Bill 2005. Petitions received. Senator Payne to move on the next day of sitting: NOTICES That the Legal and Constitutional Legislation Presentation Committee be authorised to hold a public meeting Senator Hutchins to move on the next during the sitting of the Senate on Wednesday, day of sitting: 15 June 2005, from 5.30 pm, to take evidence for the committee’s inquiry into the Crimes Legisla- That the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade tion Amendment (Telecommunications Intercep- References Committee be authorised to hold pub- tion and Other Measures) Bill 2005. lic meetings during the sittings of the Senate on 16 June, 20 June, 21 June and 22 June 2005 from Senator Crossin to move on the next day 4.30 pm, to take evidence for the committee’s of sitting: inquiry into Australia’s relationship with China. That the time for the presentation of reports of Senator Santoro to move on the next day the Employment, Workplace Relations and Edu- of sitting:

CHAMBER 46 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 cation References Committee be extended as fol- (c) calls on the Federal Government and gov- lows: ernments in all Australian states and terri- (a) Indigenous education—to 21 June 2005; tories to: and (i) introduce a ban on smoking in cars (b) student income support—to 22 June 2005. when there are any passengers in the vehicle, and Senator Carr to move on Thursday, 16 June 2005: (ii) provide funding for public education campaigns on the importance of sup- That the Public Service Amendment Regula- port for smoke-free homes and cars. tions 2004 (No. 2), as contained in Statutory Rules 2004 No. 396 and made under the Public Senator Allison to move on the next day Service Act 1999, be disallowed. of sitting: Senator Allison to move on the next day That there be laid on the table by the Minister of sitting: for Justice and Customs, no later than 10.30 am on Wednesday, 15 June 2005, copies of all reports That there be laid on the table by the Minister prepared by the Australian Customs Service since representing the Minister for Health and Ageing, 1 January 2004 which refer to issues of airport no later than 4.30 pm on Tuesday, 21 June 2005, security, including the report completed in Sep- copies of all reports provided by the Australian tember 2004, referred to on page 1 of The Austra- Episcopal Conference of the Roman Catholic lian on 31 May 2005 (‘Airport staff “smuggling Church to the Department of Health and Ageing drugs”’). for the past 5 years as part of their reporting re- quirements, including financial statements. Senator Nettle to move on Thursday, 16 June 2005: Senator Allison to move on the next day of sitting: That the Senate— (a) notes that: That the Senate— (i) 20 June 2005 is World Refugee Day of (a) congratulates the Royal Australasian Col- which the theme for 2005 is a ‘celebra- lege of Physicians and the Royal Austra- tion of courage’—a salute to the cour- lian and New Zealand College of Psychia- age of the world’s refugees, not just in trists on the release of their comprehen- enduring the persecution, but also in sive tobacco policy; the courage they show in rebuilding (b) notes that: their lives and contributing to society in (i) the policy highlights the importance of difficult or unfamiliar circumstances, smoke-free environments in reducing (ii) Australia has failed many of the coura- the harm caused by exposure to envi- geous asylum seekers who have sought ronmental tobacco smoke, protection here, and (ii) research shows that exposure to sec- (iii) thousands of Australians will mark ond-hand smoke in a vehicle is 23 World Refugee Day by protesting times more toxic than in the home, and against mandatory detention and for a (iii) the Western Australian branch of the compassionate approach to asylum Australian Medical Association has seekers; called on the Western Australian Gov- (b) condemns the Government’s treatment of ernment to protect children from pas- asylum seekers in areas including: sive smoking by introducing a ban on (i) the indefinite detention of asylum smoking in cars, particularly when seekers in conditions so harsh and there are children under the age of 18 without hope that it causes mental ill- in the vehicle; and ness in many long-term detainees,

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 47

(ii) the official discrimination and denial of (iv) according to Dr Norman Myers of Ox- services and rights to those asylum ford University climate change could seekers found to be refugees but increase the number of environmental granted only Temporary Protection Vi- refugees six-fold to 150 million over sas, the next 50 years, and (iii) the continuation of the ‘Pacific Solu- (v) Australia has an unequivocal obligation tion’, where asylum seekers have lan- to provide a humanitarian response guished on Nauru for almost 4 years, both to addressing climate change and and accepting environmental refugees, es- (iv) the forced deportation of asylum seek- pecially from our region; and ers, often to danger, in the country they (b) calls on the Government to: have fled or an inappropriate third (i) ratify the Kyoto Protocol, country; and (ii) set the Mandatory Renewable Energy (c) calls on the Government to: Target to at least 20 per cent by 2020, (i) end mandatory, non-reviewable deten- and tion of asylum seekers in Australia and (iii) agree to accept Tuvaluan refugees in on Nauru, the event that rising sea levels force an (ii) initiate a royal commission into the evacuation of Tuvalu. conditions in immigration detention Senator TCHEN (Victoria) (3.33 pm)—I and the wrongful detention of Austra- give notice that at the giving of notices on lians and lawful visa holders, and the next day of sitting I shall, on behalf of (iii) sack the Minister for Immigration and the Senate Standing Committee on Regula- Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs tions and Ordinances, withdraw: (Senator Vanstone) and the Secretary of the Department of Immigration and Business of the Senate Notice of Motion No. Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs 1 standing in my name for 4 sitting days after for the serious and chronic failures of today for the disallowance of the Administra- that department. tion Guidelines made under section 238-10 of the Higher Education Support Act 2003 Senator Nettle to move on the next day of and; sitting: Business of the Senate Notice of Motion No. That the Senate— 2 standing in my name for 5 sitting days after (a) notes that: today for the disallowance of the Guidelines (i) 20 June 2005 is World Refugee Day, in relation to the exercise of Compliance Powers in the Building and Construction In- (ii) according to the International Federa- dustry made under section 88AGA of the tion of Red Cross and Red Crescent Workplace Relations Act 1996. Societies in their World Disasters Re- port 2001, more people are now forced I seek leave to incorporate in Hansard the to leave their homes because of envi- committee’s correspondence concerning ronmental disaster than because of war, these instruments. (iii) there are approximately 25 million Leave granted. people who could currently be classi- The correspondence read as follows— fied as being environmental refugees, some 58 per cent of the world’s total Administration Guidelines made under section refugee population, many of whom are 238-10 of the Higher Education Support Act victims of climate change, 2003 2 December 2004

CHAMBER 48 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

The Hon Brendan Nelson MP of the Higher Education Support Act 2003 Guide- Minister for Education, Science and Training lines. I appreciate the Committee’s input and apologise for the delay in replying. Suite M1.24 Administration Guidelines Parliament House The Committee has asked for clarification about CANBERRA ACT 2600 the status of the Administration Guidelines. These Dear Minister were first gazetted on 17 July 2004 and then I refer to the following Guidelines made under amended with a full version gazetted on 10 Au- section 238-10 of the Higher Education Support gust 2004. The Explanatory Statement revoked Act 2003. the previous version. Administration Guidelines Amendment No. I was made to the Guidelines on These Guidelines revise the Administration 17 August 2004. Only the amendment was gazet- Guidelines by including new provisions concern- ted on that date and the Explanatory Statement ing the reporting obligations of higher education clearly states that “These Guidelines amend the providers and the requirements for provision of Administration Guidelines.” Commonwealth Assistance Notices to students. Comments According to the Explanatory Statement, these To avoid further uncertainty in the content and Guidelines purport to revoke and replace the pre- status of the Higher Education Support Act 2003 vious Administration Guidelines that commenced Guidelines in the future, I have asked my De- on 30 June 2004. However, neither the making partment to ensure that all Explanatory State- statement that accompanies these Guidelines, nor ments that accompany the Guidelines and the Guidelines themselves, expressly revoke the amendments to the Guidelines are as informative previous Guidelines. as possible. The Committee would appreciate your advice on Thank you for bringing these matters to my atten- the above matters as soon as possible, but before tion. 22 January 2005, to enable it to finalise its con- Yours sincerely sideration of these Guidelines. Correspondence Brendan Nelson should be directed to the Chairman, Senate Stand- ing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances, Minister for Education, Science and Training Room SG49, Parliament House, Canberra. ————— Yours sincerely 10 March 2005 Tsebin Tchen The Hon Brendan Nelson MP Chairman Minister for Education, Science and Training ————— Suite M1.24 7 March 2005 Parliament House Mr Tsebin Tchen CANBERRA ACT 2600 Chairman Dear Minister Standing Committee on Regulation and Ordi- Thank you for your letter of 7 March 2005 re- nances sponding the Committee’s concerns with the fol- Parliament House lowing Guidelines made under section 238-10 of the Higher Education Support Act 2003. CANBERRA ACT 2600 Administration Guidelines Dear Senator Tchen The Committee notes your advice that these Thank you for your letter of 2 December 2004 Guidelines were first gazetted on 17 July 2004 concerning your request for clarification on a and then amended with a full version gazetted on number of matters relating to the content of some

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 49

10 August 2004. The Committee is, however, earlier Guidelines should be clarified with their concerned that the version gazetted on 17 July revocation by another legislative instrument. 2004 was taken to have been revoked by the Ex- In line with this suggestion, I will shortly make planatory Statement accompanying the full ver- and table in Parliament a consolidated version of sion. An Explanatory Statement accompanying an the Administration Guidelines incorporating all instrument has no legislative character and as previous amendments and this will allow the pub- such the statement revoking the previous version lication of the Guidelines in their entirety. Fur- on 17 July 2004 has no effect. The Committee thermore, all previous versions and amendments therefore suggests that the status of the earlier to the guidelines will be revoked. Guidelines should be clarified with their revoca- tion by another legislative instrument. In the I trust that the Committee will agree to withdraw its notice of disallowance on the Guidelines ga- meantime, the Committee has given a notice of motion to disallow the Guidelines gazetted on zetted on 10 August 2004. 10 August 2004. Once again, thank you for your input on these matters. The Committee would appreciate your advice on the above matters as soon as possible, but before Yours sincerely 22 April 2005, to enable it to finalise its consid- Brendan Nelson eration of these Guidelines. Correspondence Minister for Education, Science and Training should be directed to the Chairman, Senate Stand- ing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances, ————— Room SG49, Parliament House, Canberra. Guidelines in relation to the exercise of Com- Yours sincerely pliance Powers in the Building and Construc- tion Industry made under section 88AGA of Tsebin Tchen the Workplace Relations Act 1996 Chairman 6 December 2004 ————— The Hon Kevin Andrews MP 4 May 2005 Minister for Employment and Workplace Rela- Chairman tions Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordi- Suite MG.48 nances Parliament House Australian Senate CANBERRA ACT 2600 Parliament House Dear Minister CANBERRA ACT 2600 I refer to the Guidelines in relation to the exercise Dear Mr Tchen of Compliance Powers in the Building and Con- Thank you for your letter of 10 March 2005 con- struction Industry made under section 88AGA of cerning certain Higher Education Support Act the Workplace Relations Act 1996. These Guide- 2003 Guidelines, which was in response to my lines specify guidelines to be used by a delegate letter of 7 March 2005. I appreciate the Commit- of the Secretary to the Department of Employ- tee’s continued feedback on this matter. ment and Workplace Relations in exercising pow- ers under Part VA of the Act, such as requiring a The Administration Guidelines person to provide information or documents in Thank you for your advice that an Explanatory relation to a building industry investigation. The Statement accompanying an instrument has no Committee raises the following matters with re- legislative character and consequently, the state- gard to some of the provisions contained in these ment revoking the 17 July 2004 version of the Guidelines. Administration Guidelines has no effect. I note These Guidelines commence on the date from the Committee’s suggestion that the status of the which Schedule 4 to the Workplace Relations

CHAMBER 50 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Amendment (Codifying Contempt Offences) Act 5 January 2005 2004 commences. The Explanatory Statement Senator Tsebin Tchen does not give any indication of a likely or antici- pated commencement date for that Schedule al- Chairman though the Summary to the Guidelines indicates Senate Standing Committee on Regulations and that this date was expected to be in September Ordinances 2004. Schedule 4 does not appear to have com- Room SG49 menced at this time and the commencement of Parliament House these Guidelines remains uncertain. The Commit- tee would therefore appreciate your advice on the CANBERRA ACT 2600 expected commencement of the amendment Act. Dear Senator Tchen Clause 15 of these Guidelines specifies limita- Thank you for your letter of 6 December 2004 tions on the use of the power to issue a notice. concerning the Guidelines in relation to the exer- Paragraph (a) states that a power must only be cise of Compliance Powers in the Building and used for building industry investigations, but Construction industry made under section 88AGA must not be used for matters that are minor or of the Workplace Relations Act 1996. petty. This reflects subsection 88AA(3) of the You asked for advice as to when Schedule 4 of Workplace Relations Act 1996 (as amended). the Workplace Relations Amendment (Codifying There may be differences of opinion as to Contempt Offences) Act 2004 commences. The whether a matter is ‘minor or petty’. The Com- Act provides that Schedule 4 will commence on a mittee therefore seeks your advice as to the proc- single day to be fixed by Proclamation or six esses to be followed when a recipient of a notice months after the Act receives the Royal Assent. believes that the matter is minor or petty. As the Schedule has not been proclaimed it will Further, clause 15(b) of the Guidelines states that commence on the 13 January 2005. However the the power to issue a notice must be used in good Guidelines will not commence until after a disal- faith and not for a collateral purpose. Subsection lowance period. The period for disallowance 88AA(1) of the Act requires the Secretary to have commenced on 16 November, the first day of the reasonable grounds for believing that a notice 41st parliament. The Building Industry Taskforce should be issued. The Committee suggests it may can not exercise the Schedule 4 powers until the be preferable if the good faith/non-collateral pur- Guidelines have passed the disallowance period. pose requirement was also specified in this sub- You asked for advice as to the processes to be section, rather than the Guidelines. followed when a recipient of a notice to produce Finally, the Committee seeks your advice as to documents believes that the matter is minor or whether there are procedures for the return of petty. The legislation and Guidelines include suf- documents that have been supplied in response to ficient safeguards, including extensive prelimi- a notice. nary procedures the delegate must satisfy before The Committee would appreciate your advice on issuing a notice, which should prevent notices the above matters as soon as possible, but before relating to minor or petty issues being issued. 22 January 2005, to enable it to finalise its con- However, if a person believes that the power is sideration of these Guidelines. Correspondence being used for a minor or petty purpose they may should be directed to the Chairman, Senate Stand- refuse to comply, just as they can refuse to com- ing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances, ply if some other element of the requirements has Room SG49, Parliament House, Canberra. not been complied with. It would also be open for a person to seek a declaration from the Federal Yours sincerely Court that the notice was invalid. Tsebin Tchen The Committee’s suggestion that it may be pref- Chairman erable if the good faith/non-collateral purpose ————— requirement be specified in subsection 88AA(1), rather than the Guidelines is noted. However,

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 51 given the safeguards contained in the Guidelines a recipient “may refuse to comply” or, alterna- and legislation I consider that it is sufficient that tively, might seek a Federal Court declaration. such requirements are contained only in the I seek your confirmation that these are the only Guidelines. two procedures available, and that the Guidelines You asked for advice as to whether there are pro- do not contemplate a way of resolving such a cedures for the return of documents that have matter without compelling the involvement of the been supplied in response to a notice. The process Court. I also seek your advice on the conse- and procedures by which documents are returned quences for a recipient who simply refuses to would be a matter for the Building Industry Task- comply because he or she considers the matter to force or the Secretary to determine. However it be minor. should be noted that the Secretary or delegate can The Committee would appreciate your further only keep a document for as long as it is neces- advice on the above matters as soon as possible, sary for the purposes of the conduct of the inves- but before 3 March 2005, to enable it to finalise tigation to which the document is relevant (sub- its consideration of these Guidelines. Correspon- section 88AD(1)). The person that is otherwise dence should be directed to the Chairman, Senate entitled to possession of the document is entitled Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordi- to be supplied with a certified copy of the docu- nances, Room SG49, Parliament House, Can- ment (subsection 88AD(2)). The processes put in berra. place will ensure that the Secretary or Building Yours sincerely Industry Taskforce do not retain documents for any longer than they are legally entitled to. Tsebin Tchen I trust that this letter is of assistance to the Com- Chairman mittee. ————— Yours sincerely 2 March 2005 Kevin Andrews Senator Tsebin Tchen Minister for Employment and Workplace Relation Chairman ————— Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordi- 10 February 2005 nances The Hon Kevin Andrews MP Parliament House Minister for Employment and Workplace Rela- CANBERRA ACT 2600 tions Dear Senator Tchen Suite MG.48 Thank you for your letter of 10 February 2005 Parliament House seeking further advice on behalf of the Standing CANBERRA ACT 2600 Committee regarding the Guidelines for the exer- cise of Compliance Powers in the Building and Dear Minister Construction Industry made under section Thank you for your letter of 5 January 2005 pro- 88AGA of the Workplace Relations Act 1996. viding advice in relation to the Guidelines for the You seek confirmation that the Guidelines do not exercise of Compliance Powers in the Building contemplate a way of resolving such a matter and Construction Industry made under section without compelling the involvement of the Court. 88AGA of the Workplace Relations Act 1996. The Guidelines, which are closely modelled on This advice addresses a number of the Commit- tee’s concerns. Guidelines issued by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission in relation to the ex- The Committee sought advice on the processes to ercise of information gathering powers under be followed where the recipient of a notice to section 155 of the Trade Practices Act 1974, have produce documents believed that the matter was been carefully devised to ensure that there are minor or petty. In your letter you advise that such

CHAMBER 52 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 adequate safeguards to prevent a notice being Thank you for bring the Committee’s concerns to issued for a minor or improper purpose. my attention. I trust that this letter will address The Guidelines make it clear that seeking infor- those concerns. mation or documents voluntarily is to be pre- Yours sincerely ferred and that resort to the compliance powers Kevin Andrews should only be contemplated in circumstances in Minister for Employment and Workplace which other avenues have been pursued. A notice .Relations is not to be issued without a ‘belief on reasonable grounds’ in relation to the matter. It is made clear ————— in the Guidelines that the power cannot be exer- 10 March 2005 cised for minor or petty purposes. The Hon Kevin Andrews MP The Guidelines also refer to directions to be is- Minister for Employment and Workplace Rela- sued by the Secretary to the Department of Em- tions ployment and Workplace Relations that will, amongst other matters, provide that the Secretary Suite MG.48 will have to approve each exercise of the powers. Parliament House The Guidelines and directions taken together will CANBERRA ACT 2600 ensure a high level of scrutiny of the issuing of a Dear Minister notice to ensure that it is issued for proper pur- Thank you for your letter of 2 March 2005 pro- poses. viding further advice in relation to the Guidelines The combined effect of the Guidelines and the for the exercise of Compliance Powers in the Secretary’s Directions will ensure that the powers Building and Construction Industry made under are not used for minor or petty matters. As there section 88AGA of the Workplace Relations Act are sufficient safeguards contained in the Guide- 1996. The letter raises two further issues in rela- lines and Secretary’s Directions it is not necessary tion to which the Committee seeks clarification. to provide a process for a person to challenge the The Committee previously sought advice on the notice. Doing so would only provide a means for processes to be followed where the recipient of a any person who receives a notice to seek to avoid notice to produce documents believes that the or delay compliance with that notice. matter is minor or petty. In your letter you advise The compliance powers are similar to those con- that the “combined effect of the Guidelines and tained in section 155 of the Trade Practices Act the Secretary’s Directions will ensure that the 1974. It is noteworthy that neither the Trade powers are not used for minor or petty matters,” Practices Act nor the Guidelines issued by the and that “as there are sufficient safeguards con- ACCC provide any process for a person to chal- tained in the Guidelines and Secretary’s Direc- lenge a notice. tions it is not necessary to provide a process for a You also seek advice on the consequences for a person to challenge the notice”. Given the signifi- recipient who simply refuses to comply because cance of the Secretary’s Directions in regulating he or she considers the matter to be minor. the exercise of power in this area, the Committee Section 88AA(7) provides that failure to comply would appreciate an opportunity to examine those with a notice is an offence. However, this will Directions. only be the case if the notice is valid. If a notice Secondly, in your letter you note that section was issued for the purpose of an investigation that 88AA(7) of the Act provides that failure to com- was minor or petty it would not be a valid notice. ply with a notice is an offence. However, this is As noted in my response to your previous letter, it only the case if a notice is valid, and a notice is- would also be open to a person to seek a declara- sued for the purpose of a minor or petty investiga- tion from the Federal Court. tion would not be a valid notice. Ultimately, it becomes a matter for challenge in the Federal Court. This approach seems to continue a trend of

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 53 imposing an obligation on recipients of notices Essentially the Guidelines will be the main source and other ‘offenders’ to challenge the validity of of the Directions. The relevant sections setting actions taken against them. As a matter of princi- out what will be in the Directions is extracted ple, applicants should bear the burden of having below. to demonstrate the validity of their claims. De- The Secretary’s directions require: fendants should not have to bear the burden of, in (a) Taskforce investigations to be initiated effect, disproving the validity of claims made using the general powers available to against them. Taskforce investigators under the Act The Committee would appreciate your further e.g. section 86. advice on the above matters as soon as possible, (b) The voluntary provision of informa- but before 26 April 2005, to enable it to finalise tion/documentation and the use of pre- its consideration of these Guidelines. In the mean- existing information gathering powers time, the Committee has given a notice of motion are to be the preferred forms of obtain- to disallow the Guidelines pending your response ing information/documentation directed on these matters. Correspondence should be di- at ensuring compliance with and/or in- rected to the Chairman, Senate Standing Commit- vestigating suspected/alleged breaches tee on Regulations and Ordinances, Room SG49, of the Act or an agreement or award Parliament House, Canberra. made under the Act. Yours sincerely (c) Resort to the use of Pt VA compliance Tsebin Tchen powers should only be contemplated by Chairman the delegate in circumstances in which ————— other avenues available to the Taskforce to obtain information on a voluntary ba- 29 March 2005 sis or by use of information gathering Senator Tsebin Tchen powers under section 83BH and 86 of Chairman the Act have been pursued or are not Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordi- considered to be adequate to obtain in- nances formation necessary for an investigation, because for example there is a risk that PARLIAMENT HOUSE ACT 2600 the information may be destroyed, not Dear Senator Tchen provided or provided only on terms un- Thank you for your letter of 10 March 2005 seek- acceptable to the Secretary or the dele- ing further advice on behalf of the Standing gate. Committee regarding the Guidelines for the exer- (d) Where the delegate proposes to exercise cise of Compliance Powers in the Building and the power under subsection 88AA(1), by Construction Industry made under section written notice, and require a person to 88AGA of the Workplace Relations Act 1996. give information, produce documents, or You have requested an opportunity to examine the attend and answer questions on oath or Secretary’s Directions in relation to the exercise affirmation, the delegate will advise the of these powers. My Department is currently de- Secretary prior to issuing a notice veloping these Directions but they are not ex- and will provide the Secretary with de- pected to be finalised until the powers take effect. tails of the types of the informa- However, I consider that the Guidelines provide tion/documentation/evidence being comprehensive insight into what the Directions sought; a summary of the alleged inci- will ultimately contain. At page 5 of the Guide- dent, conduct/behavior or case being in- lines, there is a comprehensive section dealing vestigated and the reasons for his belief with what the Directions will contain. that the power should be exercised in this case. In accordance with subsection 88A1(2) the Secretary will provide, the

CHAMBER 54 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Ombudsman with such information and evidence to use as evidence merely be- access to documents as required. cause a court has not compelled the pro- (e) The Secretary will consider the dele- duction of that material. gate’s advice and convey in writing to 16. The investigative power does not extend to the delegate whether he agrees with the evidence gathering once an investigation is delegate’s decision to do so. concluded and proceedings commenced. The (f) The delegate will not issue a notice delegate may not be able to issue a notice af- without the Secretary’s agreement. ter legal proceedings have commenced if do- ing so would interfere with a person’s rights The Directions will simply be a brief document to protection against self-incrimination and outlining the requirements as detailed above. self-exposure to a penalty which apply in In addition to the Secretary’s Directions, I would court proceedings and/or would interfere draw your attention to the following sections with the court’s inherent power to conduct its from the Guidelines indicating the ‘Limits on the own proceedings. use of powers’ (p8) and the ‘Requirements of a 17. While it is not possible to provide guidance valid notice’ (p9): on all possible circumstances, the delegate ‘Limits on the use of powers’ will generally not issue a notice to a private 15. There are a number of limitations on the use individual or a corporate respondent in- of the power. volved in proceedings. Rather, the delegate a The power must only be used for build- will rather rely on court procedures, such as ing industry investigations, but must not discovery, notices to produce and admit, in- be used for matters that are minor or terrogatories and subpoenas. petty. 18. The power to issue a notice for the purposes b. The power to issue a notice must be of a Taskforce investigation is not affected used in good faith, not for a collateral by another party instituting proceedings purpose. against the proposed addressee of the notice. A decision by the Taskforce to begin pro- c. The notice should not be unreasonably ceedings, as distinct from actually beginning burdensome. proceedings, does not necessarily preclude it d. The delegate is required to, and will, from issuing a section 88AA notice. have regard to the effect the exercise of These limits are one of the many safeguards the power has on the recipient, including against the improper use of these powers. The the burden it imposes on the recipient. protections that the limits on the use of the pow- However, the mere fact that a notice ers provide include that the power can not be used may pose a substantial burden does not for a matter that is minor or petty, that the power invalidate it provided the delegate has to issue a notice must be used in good faith and given it and the benefit to be derived that the notice should not be unreasonably bur- from obtaining that information consid- densome. They place conditions on when the eration and provided it is reasonable in powers may be exercised and require that the the circumstances to seek the informa- potential burden on a recipient be considered. tion requested. ‘Requirements of a valid notice’ e. The burden of complying with a notice may be affected by the amount of time 19. A notice requiring the addressee to provide allowed to comply with it. The delegate information or documents must: will provide reasonable time to comply a. disclose on its face the nature of the with a notice. That reasonable time must building industry investigation in rela- be at least 14 days. tion to which the Secretary or delegate f. It is not appropriate that the power be believes on reasonable grounds that a used to seek information, documents or person has information, documents or

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 55

evidence relevant to a building industry 24. A notice may be directed to a body corpo- investigation; rate, but where information about awareness, b. specify the information or documents in knowledge or belief is required; the notice enough detail to provide the addressee should be directed to particular persons, for with a point of reference by which to example company officers, directors or em- judge whether the notice validly requires ployees. information/documents/evidence to be This restriction on the scope of information provided; and should further ensure the appropriate exercise of c. request information or documents rele- these powers. vant to the investigation. As I explained in my previous letter, these Direc- 20. If a notice requires a person to attend an oral tions taken in conjunction with the limitations examination, the description of the nature of contained in the Guidelines provide sufficient the building industry investigation deter- safeguards to ensure that the powers are not used mines the scope of the questions that can be for minor or petty matters. asked at the examination. The purpose of these powers is to facilitate com- 21. Given the investigative nature of the notice, pliance activity in the building and construction there is no requirement that it will set out all industry. There are limits imposed on the opera- the facts necessary to constitute a contraven- tion of these powers and the Taskforce will be tion or possible contravention. Nor is it nec- required to satisfy extensive requirements before essary to set out the relevant evidence or in- they issue a notice. It is the nature of an investiga- formation on which the delegate decided to tion of this kind that the powers should operate in issue the notice. this way and I consider that too many conditions would render these powers ineffective. I am con- 22. The nature of the investigation will be de- fident that there are sufficient safeguards to en- scribed simply but in enough detail for the sure they are used appropriately. addressee to know what the subject matter (and possible contravention of the Act) is. In the process of drawing up the Guidelines, my Department has drawn upon its extensive legal These criteria should ensure that a notice is only experience in drafting legislation specifically for issued for a valid purpose. They require the nature the construction industry. As a result, I believe of the investigation to be disclosed in the notice, that we have struck a balance between ensuring for the notice to give enough detail of the infor- that the powers are used appropriately and ensur- mation or documents required and that the notice ing that the powers are able to be effective. I con- must request information or documents relevant sider that too many additional conditions would to the investigation. The detail that must be pro- now render these powers ineffective. I am confi- vided in a notice will make it clear the matter is dent that there are sufficient safeguards to ensure not to be minor or petty. they are used appropriately. Scope of information and documents that can It should be noted that it would be for the Direc- be required tor of Public Prosecutions to prosecute any case 23. Information/documents shall not be sought involving failure to comply with a notice to pro- that would: duce documents or give evidence. The ‘Prosecu- a. require the addressee to give an interpre- tion Policy of the Commonwealth’ sets out crite- tation of a document, except where ex- ria governing the decision to proceed. Key planations of symbols, codes, etc. may amongst these criteria are considerations of fair- be necessary; or ness and consistency. The criteria governing the b. require the addressee to seek out infor- decision to prosecute specifically state that “[t]he mation or documents which are not in its initial consideration in the exercise of this discre- possession, custody or control or to for- tion is whether the evidence is sufficient to justify mulate an opinion on a particular matter. the institution or continuation of a prosecution.” Applying these Guidelines would mean that it

CHAMBER 56 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 would be extremely unlikely that a prosecution Yours sincerely would be pursued in a case of a notice being is- Kevin Andrews sued for a minor or petty purpose. Minister for Employment and Workplace Rela- I do not accept your concerns that the defendant tions is bearing an unreasonable burden in a situation where they consider that a notice is invalid as it ————— relates to a minor or petty matter. Attachment—Advice from the Australian My Department has sought advice from the Aus- Government Solicitor tralian Government Solicitor (AGS) about 22 March 2005 whether it would be for the prosecution or de- Mr Peter Cully fence to establish that a notice had been issued for Director a minor or petty purpose. AGS have advised that if a prosecution has been commenced against a Organisations, Freedom of Association and Inter- person for non-compliance with a notice and the national Section, person claims, at any point, that the notice has Legal Policy Branch 1 been issued for a minor or petty purpose then the Workplace Relations Legal Group prosecution would have to prove the notice was Department of Employment and Workplace Rela- not issued for the purposes of an investigation tions that is minor or petty. The prosecution would have to prove this beyond a reasonable doubt. I GPO Box 9879 have attached a copy of that advice for your in- CANBERRA ACT 2601 formation. By facsimile: In conclusion, I would also note that the Guide- Dear Mr Cully lines are modelled on the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission Guidelines for their Subsection 88 AA(3) of the Workplace Rela- information-gathering powers. In addition section tions Act 1996—burden of proof issues 88AI of the Act provides that there will be an 1. We refer to your request of 18 March 2005. annual review by the Ombudsman of the exercise BACKGROUND of the section 88AA power. The Secretary must 2. Section 88AA of the Workplace Relations provide the Ombudsman with such information Act 1996 (‘the WR Act’) provides the Secre- and access to documents as the Ombudsman re- tary to the Department of Employment and quires. The Ombudsman must cause a copy of Workplace Relations with certain powers to each report to be tabled in each House of the Par- obtain information in relation to a ‘building liament. industry investigation’. Subsection 88AA(7) As set out in this letter and in my previous letters makes it an offence to fail to comply with a there are more than sufficient safeguards to en- relevant notice issued by the Secretary. sure that the powers are used properly. 3. Subsection 88AA(3) of the WR Act provides Thank you for bringing the Committee’s concerns that the power to issue a notice ‘must not be to my attention. I trust that this letter will resolve used for the purposes of an investigation that all of the Committee’s concerns. is minor or petty’. You have requested advice If you have further concerns I am happy to ar- as to the burden of proof in circumstances range for a member of my staff or a departmental where it is claimed that a notice under officer to meet with you and/or members of the s.88AA has been issued for a minor or petty Committee in the interests of resolving the Com- purpose. mittee’s concerns expediently. ADVICE Please contact Peter Cully on (02) 6121 7237 if 4. For the following reasons, we are of the you would like to discuss these matters further or opinion that the prosecution would bear the to arrange a meeting. burden of proving that a notice was not is-

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 57

sued for the purposes of an investigation that (i) to give the required Informa- is minor or petty. The prosecution would tion by the time, and in the have to prove that matter beyond a reason- manner and form, specified in able doubt. the notice; or Section 88A of the WR Act (ii) to produce the required docu- 5. Section 88AA of the WR Act relevantly pro- ments by the time, and in the vides as follows: manner, specified in the notice; or (1) Subject to subsections (2) and (3), if the Secretary of the Department believes on (iii) to attend to answer questions reasonable grounds that a person (the at the time and place specified relevant person): in the notice; or (a) has information or documents rele- (iv) to take an oath or make an af- vant to a building industry investi- firmation, when required to do gation; or so under subsection (5); or (b) is capable of giving evidence that is (v) to answer questions relevant to relevant to a building industry in- the investigation while attend- vestigation; ing as required by the notice. the Secretary may, by written notice 6. Section 7B of the WR Act provides that given within 3 years of the commence- Chapter 2 of the Criminal Code (except Part ment of this Part to the relevant person, 2.5) applies to all offences against this Act. require the relevant person: Note 1: Chapter 2 of the Criminal Code sets (c) to give the information to the Sec- out the general principles of criminal respon- retary, or to an assistant, by the sibility. time, and in the manner and form, Note 2: For the purposes of this Act, corpo- specified in the notice; or rate criminal responsibility is dealt with by (d) to produce the documents to the section 349, rather than by Part 2.5 of the Secretary, or to an assistant, by the Criminal Code. time, and in the manner, specified The Criminal Code in the notice; or 7. The Criminal Code is set out in the Schedule (e) to attend before the Secretary, or an to the Criminal Code Act 1995. assistant, at the time and place specified in the notice, and answer 8. Part 2.6 of the Criminal Code deals with criminal responsibility. Section 13.1 rele- questions relevant to the investiga- tion. vantly provides: (2) The time specified under para- Legal burden of proof-prosecution graph(1)(c), (d) or (e) must be at least 14 (1) The prosecution bears a legal burden of days after the notice is given. proving every element of an offense, relevant to the guilt of the person (3) The power given by subsection (1) must not be used for the purposes of an inves- charged. tigation that is minor or petty. …………………………….. ……………………………………… (3) In this Code: (7) A person commits an offence if: legal burden, in relation to a matter, means the burden of proving the exis- (a) the person has been given a notice under subsection (1); and tence of the matter. (b) the person fails: 9. Section 13.2 provides:

CHAMBER 58 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Standard of proof-prosecution …………………………….. (1) A legal burden of proof on the prosecution (6) In this Code: must be discharged beyond reasonable doubt. evidential burden, in relation to a matter, (2) Subsection (i) does not apply if the law creat- means the burden of adducing or point- ing the offence specifies a different standard ing to evidence that suggests a reason- of proof. able possibility that the matter exists or 10. The burden of proving each of the elements does not exist of the offence in subsection 88AA(7) would 14. All that is required to discharge an evidential be borne by the prosecution. An essential burden is for the defendant to point to some element of the offence is that the conduct of evidence to support the contention that the the defendant is in response to the issue of a exception, exemption, excuse, qualification notice under subsection 88AA(1). In our or justification applies to his or her circum- view, this presupposes a requirement to stances. The defendant does have the burden prove that a notice has been validly issued, of proving his or her case in that regard. The should that issue be raised. burden of disproving the matter remains with 11. The issuing of a notice under s.88AA(1) is the prosecution, and it must do so beyond a subject to s.88AA(3) which states that a no- reasonable doubt; s.13.2 of the Criminal tice may not be issued ‘for the purposes of an Code provides: investigation that is minor or petty’. There- (2) The prosecution also bears a legal bur- fore, if an objection to the notice was raised den of disproving any matter in relation in the course of proceedings, it would be for to which the defendant has discharged the prosecution to prove, beyond a reason- an evidential burden of proof imposed able doubt, that the notice was validly issued. on the defendant. When an evidential burden may be placed an 15. In any event, we do not consider that the the defence circumstances of an alleged offence against 12. There are certain circumstances in which the s.88AA(7), on which you have requested ad- Criminal Code places what is referred to as vice, give rise to any evidential burden for an ‘evidential burden’ on the defence. These the defendant. As we have noted, the validity circumstances can include when the defen- of the notice under s.88AA(1) (including that dant is relying upon some excuse or justifica- it was not issued for the purposes of an in- tion provided for by the law creating the of- vestigation that is minor or petty) would be- fence. We do not consider those circum- come an essential element of the offence for stances apply here but we mention them for the prosecution to prove, if the matter was completeness. put in issue. (The defence would merely have to raise it as an issue rather than satisfy any 13. For purposes of the present discussion, we evidential burden.) Moreover, s.88AA(3) of refer to s.13.3 of the Criminal Code, which the WR Act exists as a qualification on the relevantly provides: valid exercise of the power under s:88AA(1). Evidential burden of proof-defence That provision is not ‘an exception, exemp- …………………………. tion, excuse, qualification or justification (3) A defendant who wishes to rely on any provided by the law creating an offence’ exception, exemption, excuse, qualifica- (which is s.88A(7)). Hence, we are of the tion or justification provided by the law view that s13.3.(3) of the Criminal Code creating an offence bears an evidential would not apply. burden in relation to that matter. The ex- 16. Please let me know if we can be of any fur- ception, exemption, excuse, qualifica- ther assistance in this matter. tion or justification need not accompany the description of the offence.

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 59

Yours sincerely Senator Brown to move on Thursday, Mark Molloy 16 June 2005: Senior General Counsel That the following matters be referred to the ————— Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee for inquiry and report by 9 August 12 May 2005 2005: The Hon Kevin Andrews MP The Australian Government’s response to Minister for Employment and Workplace Rela- the defection of Chinese diplomat Chen tions Yonglin, including: Suite MG.48 (a) any information, advice, assistance or Parliament House protection, or lack thereof, given to Mr Chen from any Australian Government of- CANBERRA ACT 2600 ficial including advice that may have en- Dear Minister dangered Mr Chen’s wellbeing; Thank you for your letter of 29 March 2005 pro- (b) the response of the Minister for Foreign viding further advice concerning the Secretary’s Affairs (Mr Downer) and his department Directions in relation to the exercise of Compli- to Mr Chen’s application for asylum and ance Powers in the Building and Construction whether the Minister gave proper consid- Industry made under section 88AGA of the eration to the request; Workplace Relations Act 1996. (c) the response of the Minister for Immigra- In your letter you note that, while the Guidelines tion and Multicultural and Indigenous Af- are to be the main source of the Secretary’s Direc- fairs (Senator Vanstone) and her depart- tions, these Directions are still being developed ment to Mr Chen’s application for asylum and are not expected to be finalised until the and whether the Minister gave proper con- compliance powers take effect. The issue of the sideration to the request; effect of these unfinished Directions, particularly (d) the response of Australia’s agencies, in- in the context of the need for ‘reasonable’ exer- cluding security agencies, to the defection; cise of the powers, remains a matter of concern to the Committee. (e) any contact between the Australian and Chinese Governments in relation to the You conclude your letter by offering to arrange defection; for a departmental officer to brief the Committee in the interests of resolving the issues expediently. (f) the Australian Government’s response to The Committee would welcome the opportunity other requests from Chinese asylum seek- of a briefing. I will arrange for the Committee ers including Yuan Hongbing, Zhao Jing Secretary, Mr James Warmenhoven, to arrange a and Hao Fengjun; and briefing with Mr Peter Cully—the nominated (g) any related matters. Departmental contact officer—within the next Senator Brown to move on Monday, few weeks. 20 June 2005: Yours sincerely That the Senate commends Mr Mark Felt for Tsebin Tchen his public service in helping to expose, through Chairman The Washington Post, the involvement of the Officers from the Department of Employment and Nixon White House in the criminal conspiracy of Workplace Relations briefed the Committee on 30 Watergate. May 2005. The information provided by the de- Senator Nettle to move on the next day of partmental officers together with the minister’s sitting: responses has satisfied the Committee’s concerns. That the Senate opposes the development of nuclear power in Australia.

CHAMBER 60 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Senator Nettle to move on the next day of tion in 2006, in the absence of immedi- sitting: ate democratic reforms and the uncon- ditional release of Aung San Suu Kyi That the Senate— and other political prisoners. (a) notes the opposition to a nuclear waste dump in the Northern Territory by both COMMITTEES the Australian Labor Party and the Coun- Employment, Workplace Relations and try Liberal Party; and Education References Committee (b) calls on the Government to guarantee that Extension of Time a nuclear waste dump will not be placed in Senator GEORGE CAMPBELL (New the Northern Territory. South Wales) (3.38 pm)—by leave—At the Senator Stott Despoja to move on Thurs- request of Senator Crossin, I move: day, 16 June 2005: That the time for the presentation of the report That the Senate— of the committee on unfair dismissal laws and the (a) notes that: provisions of the Workplace Relations Amend- (i) 19 June 2005 is Daw Aung San Suu ment (Fair Dismissal Reform) Bill 2004 be ex- Kyi’s 60th birthday and that she will tended to 21 June 2005. once again spend her birthday under Question agreed to. house arrest, and BUSINESS (ii) at the time of her birthday, Aung San Rearrangement Suu Kyi will have spent approximately 10 of the past 16 years, or a total of Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— 2523 days, in detention; Minister for Justice and Customs) (3.39 (b) expresses its deep concern at recent re- pm)—by leave—I move: ports that the Burmese military is forcibly That consideration of the business before the displacing civilians in the Shan state by Senate today be interrupted at approximately 5 burning down entire villages and execut- pm, but not so as to interrupt a senator speaking, ing, torturing and raping civilians; to enable Senator Fierravanti-Wells to make her (c) strongly condemns the Burmese military’s first speech without any question before the chair. recruitment of up to 70 000 child soldiers, Question agreed to. which is more than any other nation in the COMMITTEES world; and (d) calls on the Government to: Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee (i) repeat its calls for the release of Aung San Suu Kyi, her deputy U Tin Oo, and Extension of Time all remaining political prisoners, Senator FERRIS (South Australia) (3.39 (ii) make representations to members of pm)—by leave—At the request of the Chair the United Nations Security Council, of the Legal and Constitutional Legislation calling on the Council to pass a strong Committee, Senator Payne, I move: resolution addressing the need for ur- That the time for the presentation of the report gent democratic reform and greater of the committee on Crimes Legislation Amend- protection for human rights in Burma, ment (Telecommunications Interception and and Other Measures) Bill 2005 be extended to 17 June (iii) make representations to members of 2005. the Association for Southeast Asian Question agreed to. Nations, calling on them to revoke Burma’s chairmanship of the associa-

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 61

Economics Legislation Committee LEAVE OF ABSENCE Meeting Senator FERRIS (South Australia) (3.42 Senator FERRIS (South Australia) (3.40 pm)—by leave—I move: pm)—by leave—At the request of the Chair That leave of absence be granted to Senator of the Economics Legislation Committee, Ian Campbell for the period 20 June 2005 to the Senator Brandis, I move: end of the 2005 winter sittings, on account of That the Economics Legislation Committee be government business overseas. authorised to hold a public meeting during the Question agreed to. sitting of the Senate today, from 4.30 pm, to take LEAVE OF ABSENCE evidence for the committee’s inquiry into the provisions of the Tax Laws Amendment (Im- Senator GEORGE CAMPBELL (New provements to Self Assessment) Bill (No. 1) 2005 South Wales) (3.42 pm)—by leave—I move: and a related bill. That leave of absence be granted to Senator Question agreed Mackay for the period 14 June 2005 to 23 June 2005, on account of ill health. Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee Question agreed to. Meeting NOTICES Senator FERRIS (South Australia) (3.41 Postponement pm)—by leave—At the request of the Chair Items of business were postponed as fol- of the Rural and Regional Affairs and Trans- lows: port Legislation Committee, Senator Heffer- Business of the Senate notice of motion no. nan, I move: 2 standing in the name of Senator Bartlett That the Rural and Regional Affairs and for today, proposing the reference of a mat- Transport Legislation Committee be authorised to ter to the Legal and Constitutional Refer- hold a public meeting during the sitting of the ences Committee, postponed till 15 June Senate on 15 June 2005, from 3 pm to 7.30 pm, to 2005. take evidence for the committee’s inquiry under General business notice of motion no. 123 standing order 25(2)(b) into the administration by standing in the name of the Leader of the the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and For- Australian Democrats (Senator Allison) for estry of the citrus canker outbreak. today, relating to reproductive health, post- Question agreed to. poned till 15 June 2005. Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade General business notice of motion no. 133 References Committee standing in the name of the Leader of the Australian Democrats (Senator Allison) for Meeting today, relating to nuclear weapons technol- Senator GEORGE CAMPBELL (New ogy, postponed till 15 June 2005. South Wales) (3.41 pm)—by leave—At the MELBOURNE UNIVERSITY STUDENT request of Senator Hutchins, I move: UNION That the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Senator CARR (Victoria) (3.44 pm)—by References Committee be authorised to hold a leave—I move the motion as amended: public meeting during the sitting of the Senate today, from 4.30 pm, to take evidence for the That there be laid on the table, no later than 5 committee’s inquiry into Australia’s relationship pm on Wednesday, 15 June 2005, the following with China. documents: Question agreed to. (a) all correspondence between the Minister for Education, Science and Training (Dr

CHAMBER 62 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Nelson) and all office-holders and mem- Crossin, P.M. Denman, K.J. bers of the Board, Council or Executive of Faulkner, J.P. Forshaw, M.G. the former Melbourne University Student Greig, B. Harradine, B. Union (MUSU) in 2002 and 2003, includ- Hogg, J.J. Hutchins, S.P. ing all correspondence between the Minis- Kirk, L. Lees, M.H. ter and Mr Nathan Barker, elected in late Ludwig, J.W. Lundy, K.A. 2002 as the incoming MUSU House and McLucas, J.E. Moore, C. Services Officer; and Murphy, S.M. Murray, A.J.M. Nettle, K. O’Brien, K.W.K. (b) all correspondence between the Minister Ridgeway, A.D. Sherry, N.J. and others who may not have been office- Stephens, U. Stott Despoja, N. holders and members of the Board, Coun- Webber, R. Wong, P. cil or Executive of the former MUSU in 2002 or 2003 but who subsequently be- NOES came office-holders of MUSU. Abetz, E. Barnett, G. Question agreed to. Brandis, G.H. Calvert, P.H. Campbell, I.G. Chapman, H.G.P. COMMITTEES Colbeck, R. Coonan, H.L. Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Eggleston, A. Ellison, C.M. References Committee Ferguson, A.B. Ferris, J.M. * Fifield, M.P. Harris, L. Reference Heffernan, W. Johnston, D. Senator GEORGE CAMPBELL (New Kemp, C.R. Knowles, S.C. South Wales) (3.44 pm)—On behalf of Sena- Lightfoot, P.R. Macdonald, I. tor Bishop, I move: Mason, B.J. McGauran, J.J.J. Minchin, N.H. Patterson, K.C. That the following matters be referred to the Payne, M.A. Santoro, S. Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Scullion, N.G. Tchen, T. Defence and Trade for inquiry and report: Troeth, J.M. Vanstone, A.E. (a) the ability of the Australian Defence Force Watson, J.O.W. to maintain air superiority in our region to * denotes teller 2020, given current planning; and Question agreed to. (b) any measures required to ensure air supe- TASMANIAN PULP MILL riority in our region to 2020. Senator BROWN (Tasmania) (3.53 Question put: pm)—I move: The Senate divided. [3.49 pm] That there be laid on the table by the Minister (The President—Senator the Hon. Paul representing the Prime Minister, no later than Calvert) 3.30 pm on 22 June 2005, all correspondence from January 2002 to the present between the Ayes………… 36 Prime Minister, his staff and department and Noes………… 31 Gunns Pty Ltd relating to the proposed pulp mill Majority……… 5 in Tasmania. Question agreed to. AYES DOCUMENTS Allison, L.F. Bartlett, A.J.J. Bishop, T.M. Bolkus, N. Tabling Brown, B.J. Buckland, G. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Pursuant Campbell, G. * Carr, K.J. to standing orders 38 and 166, I present Cherry, J.C. Collins, J.M.A. Conroy, S.M. Cook, P.F.S. documents listed on today’s Order of Busi-

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 63 ness at item 13 which were presented to the Statement of compliance with Senate orders President, the Deputy President and a tempo- relating to a list of contract rary chair of committees since the Senate last Correction––Statement––Attorney-General’s sat. In accordance with the terms of the portfolio agencies (presented out of sitting on standing orders, the publication of the docu- 25 February 2005) (received on 24 May 2005) ments was authorised. Returns to order The list read as follows— Health––Pregnancy support services (pursuant to order of the Senate agreed to 12 May 2005) (re- Committee reports ceived on 24 May 2005) Employment, Workplace Relations and Education Health––Tobacco––Interim report by the Austra- Legislation Committee–– Additional information lian Competition and Consumer Commission relating to the 2004-5 additional estimates: 6 vol- (pursuant to order of the Senate agreed to 27 June umes (received on 16 May 2005) 2002) (received on 25 May 2005) Environment, Communications, Information Employment––Building on Success Community Technology and the Arts References Committee– Development Employment Project: Part 1 (re- –Report––Lurching forward, looking back: ceived on 30 May 2005), and Part 2 (received on Budgetary and environmental implications of the 31 May 2005) Government’s Energy White Paper (received on 16 May 2005) Ordered that the report of the Environ- Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills–– ment, Communications, Information Tech- Alert digest no. 5 of 2005 (received on 1 June nology and the Arts References Committee 2005) be printed. Government documents Tabling 1. Government Co-contribution Scheme: Quar- The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I present terly report for 1 January 2005 to 31 March 2005 various documents and responses to resolu- (received on 16 May 2005) tions of the Senate as listed at item 14(a) to Correction to the Department of Human Services (c) on today’s Order of Business. (Finance and Administration Portfolio) portfolio supplementary additional estimates statements The list read as follows— No. 2: Appropriation Bill (No. 5) 2004-05 and the Responses to resolutions of the Senate received Appropriation Bill (No. 6) 2004-05 (received on from: 20 May 2005) High Commissioner of India (P.P. Shukla)— Office of the Gene Technology Regulator–– Resolution of 10 March 2005—Nuclear Non- Quarterly report for the period 1 October to proliferation Treaty Review 31 December 2004 (received on 10 June 2005) Chief of the Defence Force (General PJ Reports of the Auditor-General Cosgrove, AC, MC)—Resolution of 11 May Report no. 43 of 2004-2005––Performance Au- 2005—Helicopter accident on the island of Nias, dit––Veterans’ Home Care: Department of Veter- Indonesia ans’ Affairs (received on 17 May 2005) Auditor-General’s reports: Report no. 45 of 2004-2005––Performance Au- Report no. 44 of 2004-2005—Performance Au- dit––Management of selected Defence system dit—Defence’s Management of Long-term Prop- program offices: Department of Defence (re- erty Leases ceived on 27 May 2005) Report no. 46 of 2004-2005—Business Support Process Audit—Management of Trust Monies in CAC Act Entities

CHAMBER 64 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Report no. 47 of 2004-2005—Performance Au- BUDGET dit—Australian Taxation Office Tax File Number Consideration by Legislation Committees Integrity Additional Information Report no. 48 of 2004-2005—Performance Au- dit—Internationalisation of Australian Education Senator McGAURAN (Victoria) (3.56 and Training: Department of Education, Science pm)—At the request of the Chair of the and Training Community Affairs Legislation Committee, I Report no. 49 of 2004-2005—Business Support present additional information received by the Process Audit—Administration of Fringe Benefits committee relating to hearings on the 2004-05 Ta x additional estimates. Report no. 50 of 2004-2005—Performance Au- COMMITTEES dit—Drought Assistance Public Works Committee Other documents: Reports Report prepared by Eureka Strategic Research of Senator McGAURAN (Victoria) (3.56 the survey of senators’ satisfaction with depart- mental services pm)—On behalf of the Parliamentary Stand- ing Committee on Public Works, I present Letter from the Clerk of the Senate (Mr Evans)— Proposal of the Australian National Audit Office the following reports: 2nd report of 2005 to claim parliamentary privilege over certain relating to the proposed new housing for De- documents fence Housing Authority at McDowall, Bris- Letter from the President of the Senate to the bane, Queensland; 3rd report of 2005 relat- Leader of the Government in the Senate (Senator ing to the proposed Maribyrnong Immigra- Hill)—Estimates questions on notice summary tion Detention Centre additional accommo- BUDGET dation and related works, Maribyrnong, Vic- toria; 4th report of 2005 relating to the de- Portfolio Budget Statements velopment of on-base housing for Defence at Additional Information Puckapunyal, Victoria; and the 5th report of Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— 2005 relating to the Defence Science and Minister for Justice and Customs) (3.55 Technology Organisation ordnance break- pm)—I table corrections to the Immigration down facility, Port Wakefield, South Austra- and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs lia. portfolio budget statements for 2005-06. Ordered that the reports be printed. COMMITTEES Senator McGAURAN—I seek leave to Community Affairs References Committee move a motion in relation to the reports. Additional Information Leave granted. Senator GEORGE CAMPBELL (New Senator McGAURAN—I move: South Wales) (3.55 pm)—At the request of That the Senate take note of the reports. the Chair of the Community Affairs Refer- ences Committee, Senator Marshall, I pre- I seek leave to incorporate tabling statements sent further submissions and additional in- in Hansard. formation received by the committee on its Leave granted. inquiry into children in institutional care. The statements read as follows—

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 65

New Housing for Defence Housing Authority works at the Maribyrnong Immigration Detention at McDowall, Brisbane, Queensland Centre at Maribyrnong in Victoria. The McDowall project was referred to the Com- This work was referred to the Committee for con- mittee on 6 December 2004 at an estimated cost sideration and report on 9 December 2004 at an of $17.5 million. estimated cost of $7 million. The purpose of the work is to provide 50 houses The Department’s proposal is driven chiefly by to meet the operational requirements of Defence, the need to provide adequate separation for dif- mainly to service the nearby Enoggera Army ferent categories of detainees. In its current form, Base. It is intended that the houses will be ready the Centre allows only for the separation of adult for occupation in November 2006. males from females and families. The facility The proposal presented to the Committee com- needs to be expanded and reconfigured in order to prises protect the welfare of residents and staff. • 40 conventional and ten small housing lots; The Department intends that the proposed works should deliver: • two park areas with a total area of 6,170 • square metres; the ability to separate different detainee groups; • internal roads and footpaths; • an increase in capacity of some 50 places; • access roads; and • • increased amenity for residents, particularly stormwater, drainage, sewerage, communica- women and children; tions and electrical services. • improved resident recreation and access to The Committee inspected the site of the proposed outdoor facilities; development and conducted a public hearing in Brisbane on 24 February 2005. Issues explored at • improved disabled facilities for residents and the hearing included site selection, the nature of visitors; the development, traffic management, consulta- • increased privacy in the new areas; tion and a range of environmental issues. • better security; Subsequent to the hearing, the Committee re- • improved OH&S conditions for staff; and ceived a letter from a McDowall resident outlin- • ing some concerns in relation to the proposed the provision of some self-catering facilities. development. This correspondence was forwarded In order to achieve these outcomes, the Depart- to the Defence Housing Authority and the Com- ment proposes to construct additional accommo- mittee recommends that the Authority continue to dation in the form of demountable buildings and engage in close consultation with owners of to reconfigure existing facilities to accommodate neighbouring properties and the wider McDowall a further 50 detainees within the existing Centre community. Having examined all the evidence boundaries. The Department intends that the pro- presented to it, the Committee recommends that posed works will: the proposed housing development project pro- “…achieve additional accommodation that pro- ceed at the estimated cost of $17.5 million. vides improved amenity and demonstrates a clear ————— regard for the personal needs and dignity of the Provision of Facilities for Maribyrnong Immi- residents” and gration Detention Centre Additional Accom- “…provide detention infrastructure that is hu- modation and Related Works, Maribyrnong, mane, non-punitive and sensitive to the needs of Victoria people held under administrative detention.” The Committee’s third report of 2005 addresses a The Committee visited the Maribyrnong Immi- proposal from the Department of Immigration and gration Detention Centre on 23 February 2005 Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs to provide and conducted public hearings in Melbourne on additional accommodation and carry out related 23 February and in Canberra on 7 March.

CHAMBER 66 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

During its investigations, the Committee consid- addressed. The Committee does not believe that ered a range of matters relating to the need, pur- remand centres and backpacker hostels are en- pose, scope, cost and value-for-money of the pro- tirely appropriate analogies for detention accom- posed work. modation as the freedom of movement available The Committee was primarily concerned at the to the occupants of such facilities are markedly Department’s proposal to accommodate a further different. In respect of building codes and stan- 50 detainees within the boundary of the existing dards, the Committee therefore recommends that site. The Committee acknowledges the consider- the Department of Immigration and Multicultural able challenges faced by the Department in re- and Indigenous Affairs consult with appropriate spect of providing additional places at the government and professional bodies to establish a Maribyrnong facility and is appreciative of the national benchmark for the construction and fit- efforts made to make the best possible use of the out of Immigration Detention Centres and Immi- limited space available. However, the Committee gration Reception and Processing Centres. does not believe that a population increase of the Similarly, the Committee noted that there is no magnitude proposed would enhance amenity to agreed standard for the per capita provision of residents or satisfy the Department’s intention to space and amenities at immigration detention provide “humane and non-punitive detention in- facilities In respect of the ratio between liv- frastructure”. ing/recreation space, amenities and occupancy, Following their inspection of the existing facili- the Committee recommends that the Department ties, members were in no doubt as to the pressing of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous need for refurbishment, particularly in respect of Affairs consult with appropriate government and the existing ablutions and family accommodation professional bodies with a view to establishing a area. Members were disappointed to note that the national benchmark for room occupancy and re- detailed project cost estimate did not include spe- lated indoor and outdoor recreation areas, ablu- cific amounts for extensive refurbishment of the tions, kitchen and laundry facilities at Immigra- existing accommodation. The Committee was tion Detention Centres and Immigration Recep- unanimous in its view that the proposal did not tion and Processing Centres. appear to be accomplishing the stated purpose of Members were also concerned to note that ac- improving the overall amenity of the facility and commodation at the Centre is based on quadruple providing “humane and non-punitive detention occupancy of double bunk rooms. Whilst the infrastructure”—particularly considering the pro- rooms in the proposed new accommodation zone posed 65 per cent increase in occupancy. The will measure 15 square metres plus ensuite, some Committee therefore recommends that, in order to rooms in the existing section are only 11 square maintain a reasonable level of amenity, the cur- metres, with access to shared ablutions. Members rent maximum occupancy of the Maribyrnong concluded that, whilst quadruple occupancy of Immigration Detention Centre be increased by no the larger ensuite rooms proposed for construc- more than 20 places, with a total maximum occu- tion under the extension project would be accept- pancy in surge periods of not more than 100 de- able, quadruple occupancy of the existing non- tainees. ensuite rooms did not represent an appropriate In respect of the project scope, the Committee level of amenity. In order to fulfil the Depart- noted the Department’s intention to utilise port- ment’s objective of providing “humane and non- able accommodation units at the site and recom- punitive detention infrastructure”, the Committee mends that these be of an acceptable standard to recommends that the Department reduce the ensure a reasonable level of comfort and amenity number of detainees accommodated in the exist- for detainees. ing double-bunk rooms at the Maribyrnong Im- migration Detention Centre to two persons per The Committee was concerned to learn that there room. Moreover, the Committee recommends is no single national or international building that, wherever possible, occupancy of new ensuite code or standard for immigration detention facili- rooms should be kept below the maximum of ties and believes that this deficiency should be

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 67 four, especially in cases where the detention pe- 2, 4, 5 and 7 of its report. Further, the Committee riod is prolonged. seeks a response from the Department of Immi- The Committee is of the view that the Department gration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs should act promptly to redress the shortcomings in respect of the Department’s intention to adopt of the existing accommodation at Maribyrnong in the recommendations made herewith. order to meet the stated project objective of pro- In closing, I wish to thank my Committee col- viding “humane and non-punitive” detention fa- leagues for their cooperation throughout this in- cilities. The Committee recommends that the De- quiry, the Hansard and the staff of the secretariat. partment of Immigration and Multicultural and I commend the Report to the Senate. Indigenous Affairs expedite the proposed routine maintenance and upgrade of existing ablutions ————— and accommodation facilities in order to reduce DEVELOPMENT OF ON-BASE HOUSING the disparity in quality of accommodation be- FOR DEFENCE AT PUCKAPUNYAL, tween the old and new wings of the Maribyrnong VICTORIA, Immigration Detention Centre. The first of the proposed works is intended to During their visit to the Centre, members ob- provide 80 on-base houses to meet current and served that the existing bedrooms do not have future Defence Force accommodation require- doors, but were pleased to note that the Depart- ments at the Puckapunyal Military Area. The De- ment includes improved privacy for residents fence Housing Authority intends that delivery of among the anticipated project outcomes. In order the new homes will occur progressively between to fulfil the Department’s objective of providing February and November 2006. The estimated cost “humane and non-punitive detention infrastruc- of the project is $19.6 million. ture which provides a clear regard for the per- The proposed works will comprise: sonal needs and dignity of residents”, the Com- • construction of 80 houses; and mittee recommends that the Department install • bedroom doors or bed-curtaining in all rooms at associated stormwater drainage, communica- the Maribyrnong Immigration Detention Centre tions, sewerage reticulation, gas and electri- to ensure an appropriate level of privacy for de- cal services. tainees. The Committee visited the site of the proposed In respect of the reconfiguration of the Centre, works and conducted a public hearing at Pucka- members questioned whether the design repre- punyal on 20 April 2005. sented the best solution in terms of access to rec- Having explored a variety of issues relating to the reational space for families and children, as the need for the new homes, the consultation con- selected option will not provide families with ducted with stakeholders, the provision of ser- immediate and unescorted access to the largest vices and amenities, and the environmental man- outdoor recreation area. The Committee questions agement of the project, the Committee was satis- whether this solution adequately meets the De- fied that the works would meet all stated project partment’s intention to improve “…amenity for objectives and would represent an improved level residents, particularly women and children…”. In of amenity for Defence families. The Committee view of this, the Committee recommends that the therefore recommends that the works proceed at Department give consideration to using the pro- the estimated cost of $19.6 million. posed new Zone A of the extended Maribyrnong ————— Immigration Detention Centre for the accommo- DEFENCE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY dation of families in order to allow children ORGANISATION ORDNANCE BREAK- greater access to the centre’s largest outdoor rec- DOWN FACILITY, PORT WAKEFIELD, reation area. SOUTH AUSTRALIA Having reviewed the evidence presented to it, the The Committee’s fifth report of 2005 addresses Committee recommends that the works proceed works required to enhance Defence research ca- subject to the acceptance of recommendations 1,

CHAMBER 68 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 pability in respect of explosive ordnance and the eight criteria for inclusion on the Ramsar List weaponry. This research is necessary to support of Wetlands of International Importance. the work of the Australian Defence Force and Having thoroughly examined the proposal, the associated organisations in ensuring national se- Committee recommends that the construction of curity. an ordnance breakdown facility for the Defence At present, research into weapons and ordnance is Science and Technology Organisation at Port conducted at the Defence Science and Technol- Wakefield, South Australia, proceed at the esti- ogy Organisation Facility at Edinburgh, South mated cost of $8.4 million. Australia, and the Proof and Experimental Estab- Mr President, I would like to extend thanks to my lishment at Port Wakefield. Safety requirements Committee colleagues, the secretariat staff and all at these sites currently limit investigation to those who helped with these inquiries, and I small-size ordnance. The proposed work would commend the Reports to the Senate. address this deficiency by enabling research into a wider range of explosive ordnance and weap- Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) (3.57 ons. pm)—I rise to speak to the motion moved by Work elements to meet Defence’s objectives con- Senator McGauran in relation to the four sist of: reports of the Parliamentary Joint Standing Committee on Public Works. I specifically • a control room for the remote monitoring and operation of ordnance breakdown equipment want to speak to the report on the proposed in other areas of the facility; Maribyrnong immigration detention centre. The motion moved by Senator McGauran • a cutting building for the radiography and remotely controlled cutting of ordnance; was that the Senate take note of that report and the other reports before us. • a disassembly building for the safe radio- graphic examination and breakdown of ex- I must emphasise that I am not a member plosive ordnance; of the Joint Standing Committee on Public • two explosive ordnance storehouses; Works, so I have not seen the report and was not able to participate in the specific inquiry. • a storage building to house general equip- ment; The Joint Standing Committee on Public Works does have a very narrow term of ref- • engineering services, including power, water, sewerage, communications and sealed roads; erence. It does not relate specifically to pol- and icy matters per se; it looks much more nar- rowly at public works—usually buildings, • security provisions, comprising fencing and a Type 1 security system. defence housing and other government facili- ties. In the course of its inquiry, the Committee was assured that the proposed works would take ac- The issue at the heart of this report, the count of all necessary occupational and public proposed new Maribyrnong immigration safety requirements, and would also entail appro- detention centre, is an issue that I believe priate security measures. The Committee was also needs further noting, not so much in terms of satisfied at the level of consultation conducted by whether we are getting value for money— the Department with the community and other whether we are picking the right quality ce- stakeholders, including the execution of land ac- ment and those sorts of things—but in terms quisition procedures. of whether it is actually necessary, desirable In respect of environmental impacts, members and appropriate to be building expanded were pleased to learn that the works would result immigration detention facilities. People in improvements to the habitat of an endangered local bird species, and further, that the Proof and would say that, if we are going to have better Experimental Establishment site had met four of quality facilities, that is better for the people

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 69 who are detained within them—and I do not the amount of expenditure in this area over dispute that. Any opportunity to have better recent years, we see it is simply scandalous. facilities for people whilst they are in deten- The broader issue here that underpins tion is, on the face of it, desirable. But the what these reports are about is value for bigger question, of course, is whether we money for the taxpayer. There is no way that should be having so many of those people in it is value for money for the taxpayer to be detention facilities. spending hundreds of millions of dollars on Senators would know that the Australian new facilities and on expanding and upgrad- Democrats have long opposed mandatory ing facilities to detain people when we do detention in this country. Our record on that not need to be doing that in the first place. is totally consistent and very longstanding, The Maribyrnong centre, which is in Mel- over more than a decade. But the bigger is- bourne, is small bickies compared to some of sue here is not even mandatory detention. the others. It is estimated, depending on Many people misrepresent the position of the which document you read, that the one that is Democrats and others who oppose manda- still proposed for Christmas Island, which tory detention, saying that we support an will accommodate a total of around 800 peo- open door policy and believe there should be ple, will cost over $300 million. That is $300 no detention at all. That is not the case. Cer- million to build a detention facility on tainly, on behalf of the Democrats, I state Christmas Island, when we have an empty that we do not support an open door policy detention facility, in mothballs, at Port Hed- and we certainly do not suggest that there are land, when we have the Baxter detention not circumstances where it may be appropri- facility at less than half capacity, and when ate to have people in detention for migration we have an empty facility—it has been related matters. But the fact is that we have empty for a few years—in Darwin, which we far too many people in migration detention are now going to spend more money on to and far too many of those people are in there upgrade. We have a proposal for a facility in for far too long. We have people in there, Brisbane still on the books, and we have the including children, who are in detention for facility at Woomera. Enormous amounts of months and years. money have been spent upgrading and ex- The simple matter is that, if we did not panding that facility—mainly on security— have that policy—an unjustified, immoral and then within a year or two that money is and unnecessary policy—we would not need mothballed. this report at all. We would not need the ad- Billions of dollars have been spent on a ditional accommodation or the related works totally unnecessary policy that causes im- because we would not need the detention mense harm to people, distorts the rule of centre. As I said before, there is a case for law, subverts due process and, on any objec- people being detained for migration purposes tive criteria, does not contribute one bit to in select circumstances for specific reasons border protection under any sensible mean- and for limited periods of time. If we had ing of the term. It is a stupid waste of money that policy, obviously we would need to have purely because the government will not ad- one or two facilities somewhere. But we mit the blatantly obvious: that this policy is would certainly not need to have the vast and not necessary, that it causes immense harm continuing endless expenditure on building, and that there are alternatives that are not expanding, refurbishing and adding new de- only more humane but more workable and tention centres, time after time. If we look at much more in accordance with our legal and

CHAMBER 70 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 democratic traditions, and they would save struction of these detention centres is wrong. us a fortune. It is time for that policy to be changed. I for one believe that it is time to start say- Senator ALLISON (Victoria—Leader of ing no to more and more public money being the Australian Democrats) (4.05 pm)—I also spent on more and more detention facilities, rise to speak to the report of the Public with a few little bandaids around the side Works Committee on the Maribyrnong de- now and then to take the pressure off the tention centre. As a Victorian I want to make Prime Minister whenever one case comes up some brief remarks about this report. I have that makes things look difficult. It is time to not yet had the benefit of seeing it, but being recognise that the whole policy does not a regular visitor to Maribyrnong I do know work, and you cannot continue to adjust, something of the background to this. It is not amend and build on something when its a bad thing that we are improving that ac- foundations are completely and utterly in commodation, although I agree with my col- ruins. The foundations of the mandatory de- league that quite a few of the people who are tention policy—its legal foundations, its at Maribyrnong ought not be there. ethical and moral foundations, and its policy I agree too that we should not be increas- foundations—are completely bankrupt. Con- ing accommodation in detention centres tinuing to build on and amend that policy, overall, including Maribyrnong. One of the whether it is building new centres or chang- reasons is that this will take over a substan- ing the way that the policy works so that it tial area of open space at the present time— can operate in a supposedly more flexible or space which had been denied to detainees for more humane way, is ignoring the core prob- about two years because the government ar- lem, which is that the policy, the law itself, is gued that security arrangements were not in corrupt. place, despite several-metres-high steel walls Until we acknowledge that, we will con- and ribbon wire and what appeared to me to tinue to waste more money. It is bad enough be a very secure environment. These detain- to be wasting money but this is wasting ees have only just had access to that outdoor money to generate human suffering for no space—a pretty miserable outdoor space good end, other than political ends for a gov- too—but this development is proposing to ernment that refuse to admit that they have use much of that space up. The problem is got it wrong—and both major parties have that, when people are there for lengths of refused to admit that they have got it wrong. time—many years in some cases; the people Time after time they have kept cracking that I have talked with are still there or have down, one thing after another, and they have been kept there for five years or more— never taken a step back and said: ‘Maybe whilst nothing is more important than getting we’ve gone in the wrong direction. Maybe them out, if they cannot move around in this we need to choose another path.’ Surely there very confined environment it is obviously is enough evidence out there now that we not good for their mental health. need to choose another path. It certainly does I point out as well that Maribyrnong not involve building more detention centres, council has been very opposed to this expan- additional accommodation and related sion. I think the government let the council works, even if it means good value for know that this was happening, but that was money, and we are getting top quality bricks about the extent of the consultation that took and cement and nice clean floors. The simple place. This does matter to the Maribyrnong fact is that the policy that is behind the con-

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 71

City Council because adjacent to the them running off and disappearing, particu- Maribyrnong detention centre is a brand new larly those people with children. Children housing development. Quite a substantial have to be put through school and looked area of land has been set aside for redevel- after. It would be extremely difficult, I would opment. You are going to have some quite suggest, for a couple or an individual with expensive housing, I would say, which will children to simply ‘get off scot-free’, as the back onto the detention centre. In fact, the minister suggested, as if they had committed mayor, when I last spoke with her, indicated a crime—and, of course, the majority of asy- that the plan was to put up another very large lum seekers have not. As a Victorian senator fence so that the people in this new housing I want to add my voice and express my con- development would not have to look onto the cern at this proposal—a concern which, from misery of the Maribyrnong detention centre what I can gather, has been echoed to some and very obviously prison-like circumstances extent in some of the comments and content in which people live—that is, as I said, with of this report. razor wire and very high walls. Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) Having said all of that, I should also say (4.11 pm)—I rise to take note of report of the that the conditions inside the Maribyrnong Public Works Committee on the Maribyr- centre—and I am told this is better than most nong detention centre. The Senate, in taking other detention centres—are pretty miser- note of this document, is being asked effec- able. In the male quarters the dormitory tively to approve the building of more immi- spaces are occupied by four men in very nar- gration detention centres—this one at row, short, steel double bunks, with a very Maribyrnong. Last Thursday I was out the narrow space in between those two sets of front of Villawood detention centre when the beds. There is very little by way of furni- Minister for Immigration and Multicultural ture—a simple metal cabinet—and there are and Indigenous Affairs turned the first three bars on the window and a pretty miserable sods of the new detention centre to be built at outlook. Together with that there are the so- Villawood. I thought then, as I think now, called isolation rooms, which have nothing that, in the midst of all of the claims about in them. All in all, this is not good place for the way in which we need to be ending this anyone to be. I welcome any proposal to im- system of mandatory detention, the minister prove those conditions. on Thursday opened and turned those first However, I reiterate what my colleague sods of a brand new detention centre that is has just said: most of the people who are not just any detention centre but a new de- there should not be there in the first place. tention centre that is designed specifically They are there because they are asylum for locking up women and children. seekers and they are going through a process. The minister seeks on these sorts of occa- It makes no sense to be locking them up sions, as she did on Thursday and has subse- when most of them are waiting for some quently, to claim that this is an opportunity court process to take place. They are the last for families to live in the community. As for ones likely to abscond. It puzzles me. Even these residential housing projects that the the minister today said, ‘We’re not going to minister was opening at Villawood last let people off scot-free.’ These people are not Thursday, I have been to visit such a residen- going to wander off and disappear. It is in tial housing project in Port Augusta. It is their interest to have visas and full perma- quite incredible to see the way in which this nent residency in this country. I cannot see government is able to transform a normal

CHAMBER 72 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 suburban street into a prison. What they do is have a specific allowance—that is the only build two large fences all of the way around money they are allowed to spend—for buy- it. Regularly around it they position cameras, ing food that they may cook for their family which give 24-hour monitoring of people in the residential housing project. When they who are held within that particular facility. are there we have the circumstance where, if There are motion detectors so that, if anyone they seek to spend any more money than that opens the window after 11 o’clock at night, allowance or to spend that money inappro- an alarm goes off, given the expectation that priately, the private security guard argues they are going to escape over the two fences, with the mother at the checkout about what through the motion detectors, past the 24- she can be buy and how much money she hour security cameras and out into the com- can spend buying food for her children. If munity. that is not a paternalistic attitude about the If there are schoolchildren in that area— way in which asylum seekers and mothers and there often are—then, on their way to should be able to look after their own chil- school, they go through an X-ray. An X-ray dren, I do not know what it is. But the minis- wand is waved over them, as is done in our ter claims that this is about women and chil- airports, and their bags are also searched. On dren being able to live in the community. the way home from school, yet again their You are not living in the community when, bags are searched and they go through an X- as occurs in these residential housing pro- ray by these guards. Regularly throughout jects, if you run into somebody in the super- the day in these places—and the minister market that you know and enter into a con- likes to describe this as families living in the versation, the guard not only removes you community—guards from the private secu- from that situation but also can deny you the rity company contracted to run our immigra- right to go the shopping centre the next week tion detention centres come into people’s to buy food for your children. That is not homes every couple of hours to do a head living in the community. It is not living in count. When I went and visited one of those the community if you cannot talk to people homes in a residential housing project in Port in your local shopping centre. It is not living Augusta, the place was in disarray. One in the community if you cannot lean over the woman had been in there for an indetermi- two fences and the security cameras to talk nate period of time. She did not know how to your neighbours. It is not living in the much longer she was going to be in there. community if you have your bag searched on She was being held in there away from her the way to school when you are a six-year- partner, who was elsewhere. Often the part- old. It is not living in the community if you ner is in another immigration detention cen- have a security guard arguing with you at the tre and mothers are held there with their checkout about what you can and cannot buy children away from and without any ability to feed your children. And yet the minister to engage with the community, certainly puts up this ridiculous idea that this is about without any ability to know what is going on allowing women and children to live in the and for how much longer they will be held community. there. Today we hear more announcements. The When I visited those women and children government, in their negotiations with Petro they told me about the circumstance where, Georgiou and others, are saying perhaps we once a week, they are being taken by the should allow fathers to live in this environ- guards to the local shopping centre. They ment as well. That is not living in the com-

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 73 munity. Allowing fathers to be able to be been 10 children now living in detention cen- treated in this degrading way and to be a part tres who have been born there. All of those of an area that has turned from a suburban people do not deserve to have a minister who street into a prison is not living in the com- sends these issues off to a closed inquiry. munity. It is just another form of prison. The They deserve for there to be an open, public minister for immigration, in response to the and transparent inquiry. They do not deserve concerns we have seen now for years— to have a system of mandatory detention particularly about children in detention but, supported by both the major parties which in general, about the operations of our immi- says, ‘We are going to lock these people up. gration detention centres—responds to these Maybe if they appear on the front page of the concerns by opening a new detention centre newspaper we will ask some questions later.’ for women and children last Thursday. And That is an utterly irresponsible way for the here in the Senate we are again being asked government to run public administration of to consider more changes and the building of these affairs. more expansive detention centres, this time The way in which, scandal after scandal, in Victoria. That is not a minister who is tak- the department changes and manipulates the ing seriously her responsibility to her portfo- way it deals with these issues is outrageous. lio and to her individual duty of care for the It is an outrageous way to run this admini- people that she holds in detention. stration. During the estimates committee A minister who was responsible would not process I asked a number of questions about respond to this crisis by going out and turn- particular detainees. One of those was an ing three sods of soil, like the minister did on Iraqi man with a hand deformed because Thursday, for the building of another deten- members of Saddam Hussein’s Baathist re- tion centre for children and women to be gime had hit it with a burning metal rod. locked up in. That is not an appropriate way They also tortured and killed his father. That to be dealing with this immigration detention man was sitting in Baxter detention centre at debacle that the current minister is presiding the time I asked the minister questions about over. An appropriate way would be to set up whether he could be released on a bridging a judicial inquiry—an open, public inquiry— visa for the torture and trauma that he had where we can hear about the way in which faced. Two days later, I got a message to say this department and this minister are admin- the man had been released. I asked another istering this system of mandatory detention. question about a man in immigration deten- The Greens certainly say that we need to go tion who, out of desperation—he had been in further than that. The system of mandatory there for five years and was the longest serv- detention that exists in this country, which ing detainee in Villawood detention centre— this government, minister and department had drunk a bottle of bleach the night before preside over, is one which says, ‘We will the estimates hearings. That is the action of a lock people up and ask questions later.’ That desperate man in a desperate situation—a is not appropriate. Think of all of the scan- man who happens to have been one of the dals that we have seen, whether it be Vivian carers for the three-year-old in Villawood, Alvarez, Cornelia Rau or three-year-old Naomi Leong, who I mentioned before. I Naomi Leong, who has spent all her life up asked questions about that particular man of until a couple of weeks ago when she ap- Immigration and a week later, I think it was, peared on the front page of the newspaper, he was released from detention. living in a detention centre. I think it has

CHAMBER 74 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

I hope that the asking of those questions I present the third report of the Parliamentary and the release of those detainees were not Joint Committee on ASIO, ASIS and DSD under connected. I hope sincerely that this govern- section 102.1A of the Criminal Code Act 1995. In ment, minister and department are not mak- this report the Committee has reviewed the listing ing decisions on the basis of issues being of the al-Zarqawi network as a terrorist organisa- tion for the purposes of section 102.1 of the raised in the Senate, the estimates process, Criminal Code. the media or wherever it may be, and to de- In its first report, Review of the listing of the Pal- cide only then to release people from deten- estinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), the Committee de- tion. If that is so, it is an appalling way to run cided that it would test the validity of the listing public administration of the department of of a terrorist organisation under the Criminal immigration, or any other department for that Code on both the procedures and the merits. matter. So I hope those issues, the asking of Overall, the Committee is pleased that the Gov- questions about detainees and the subsequent ernment’s procedure in listing terrorist organisa- release of those particular individuals, are tions is developing into a more focused and thor- entirely unrelated. We should not be support- ough process. In particular, on this occasion, the ing the building of any new detention cen- States and Territories were provided with more tres. We should be supporting the disman- notice than previous listings and consultation tling of this system of mandatory detention occurred between the Prime Minister and Pre- which says, ‘Lock people up first and ask miers and Chief Ministers as required under sub- clause 3.4(6) of the Inter-Governmental Agree- questions later.’ ment on Counter-terrorism Laws. Question agreed to. However, consultation with the Department of ASIO, ASIS and DSD Committee Foreign Affairs and Trade still appears to be Reports somewhat inadequate. The Committee would encourage DFAT to provide more detailed advice Senator McGAURAN (Victoria) (4.21 to the Attorney-General’s Department in future pm)—On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint listings under the Criminal Code. This advice Committee on ASIO, ASIS and DSD, I pre- may include an assessment of the foreign policy sent a report on the review of the listing of implications of a listing and any information re- Tanzim Qa’idat al-jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn lating to Australia’s obligations to the United (the al-Zarqawi network) as a terrorist or- Nations on the particular organisation. ganisation and the annual report of the com- In its previous report, Review of the listing of six mittee’s activities for 2004-05. terrorist organisations, the Committee recom- Ordered that the report be printed. mended that a comprehensive information pro- gram, that takes account of relevant community Senator McGAURAN—I seek leave to groups, be conducted in relation to any listing of move a motion in relation to the reports. an organisation as a terrorist organisation. At the Leave granted. hearing on this listing, the Attorney-General’s Department advised that they are developing a Senator McGAURAN—I move: response to the Committee’s recommendation on That the Senate take note of the reports. community consultation and the Committee looks I seek leave to incorporate a tabling state- forward to the implementation of this recommen- ment in Hansard. dation. At the hearing for the Committee’s earlier report, Leave granted. Review of the listing of six terrorist organisations, The statement read as follows— ASIO advised the Committee of their evaluation process in selecting entities for proscription under the Criminal Code. In this review, the Committee

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 75 examined ASIO’s criteria in more detail and con- Senator ABETZ (Tasmania—Special tinues to gain a better understanding of the proc- Minister of State) (4.22 pm)—by leave—I ess of selecting organisations for listing. The pro- move: scription of an organisation under the Criminal Code creates serious criminal offences and the That senators be discharged from and ap- Committee would like to stress the need for clear pointed to committees as follows: reasons explaining why it is necessary to pro- Finance and Public Administration Ref- scribe an organisation. erences Committee— The Committee is pleased that links to Australia Appointed—Substitute members: Sena- is one of the factors considered by ASIO. Al- tors Fierravanti-Wells and Bartlett to re- though the Committee understands that direct place Senators Heffernan and Ridgeway links to Australia are not legally necessary in or- for the committee’s inquiry into the Gal- der for an organisation to be listed under the lipoli Peninsula Criminal Code, it is the Committee’s view that it Legal and Constitutional Legislation should be a primary consideration in determining Committee— whether to proscribe an organisation. Appointed—Participating member: In this review, the Committee measured the al- Senator Ludwig. Zarqawi network against ASIO’s stated evalua- Question agreed to. tion process. The al-Zarqawi network has en- gaged in and continues to engage in violent ter- ASBESTOS-RELATED CLAIMS rorist acts, in particular, the organisation has (MANAGEMENT OF claimed responsibility for an attack on an Austra- COMMONWEALTH LIABILITIES) lian Defence Force convoy in Baghdad last year (CONSEQUENTIAL AND and a vehicle bombing near the Australian Em- TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS) BILL bassy in Baghdad in January of this year. The 2005 Committee was also advised that the organisation does have some links to Australia. ASBESTOS-RELATED CLAIMS It is therefore the Committee’s view that the pro- (MANAGEMENT OF scription of the al-Zarqawi network in Australia is COMMONWEALTH LIABILITIES) potentially useful insofar as it prevents Austra- BILL 2005 lians from assisting the organisation either finan- IMPORT PROCESSING CHARGES cially or personally. AMENDMENT BILL 2005 In this review, there continued to be much debate CUSTOMS LEGISLATION between the Committee and government officials AMENDMENT (IMPORT PROCESSING on the selection processes for proscription under the Criminal Code. It is hoped that this will be a CHARGES) BILL 2005 continuing and constructive dialogue. SUPERANNUATION BILL 2005 The Committee does not recommend to the Par- SUPERANNUATION liament that this regulation be disallowed. (CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS) I recommend the report to the Senate. BILL 2005 Membership SUPERANNUATION LAWS The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT AMENDMENT (ABOLITION OF (Senator Bolkus)—The President has re- SURCHARGE) BILL 2005 ceived letters from party leaders seeking to TAX LAWS AMENDMENT vary the membership of committees. (MEDICARE LEVY AND MEDICARE LEVY SURCHARGE) BILL 2005

CHAMBER 76 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

AGED CARE AMENDMENT (EXTRA That these bills may proceed without formali- SERVICE) BILL 2005 ties, may be taken together and be now read a first time. CIVIL AVIATION AMENDMENT BILL 2005 Question agreed to. CRIMES AMENDMENT BILL 2005 Bills read a first time. HEALTH LEGISLATION Second Reading AMENDMENT (AUSTRALIAN Senator ABETZ (Tasmania—Special COMMUNITY PHARMACY Minister of State) (4.25 pm)—I table a cor- AUTHORITY) BILL 2005 rection to the explanatory memorandum to HIGHER EDUCATION LEGISLATION the Asbestos-related Claims (Management of AMENDMENT (2005 MEASURES No. 2) Commonwealth Liabilities) Bill 2005 and BILL 2005 move: INDIGENOUS EDUCATION That these bills be now read a second time. (TARGETED ASSISTANCE) I seek leave to have the second reading AMENDMENT BILL 2005 speeches incorporated in Hansard. MARITIME TRANSPORT SECURITY Leave granted. AMENDMENT BILL 2005 The speeches read as follows— PAYMENT SYSTEMS (REGULATION) ASBESTOS-RELATED CLAIMS AMENDMENT BILL 2005 (MANAGEMENT OF COMMONWEALTH PRIMARY INDUSTRIES (EXCISE) LIABILITIES) (CONSEQUENTIAL AND TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS) BILL 2005 LEVIES AMENDMENT (RICE) BILL 2005 The Asbestos-related Claims (Management of Commonwealth Liabilities) (Consequential and SEX DISCRIMINATION AMENDMENT Transitional Provisions) Bill 2005 provides for (TEACHING PROFESSION) BILL 2004 the repeal of the Stevedoring Industry Finance SUPERANNUATION LEGISLATION Committee legislation. The main Bill will transfer AMENDMENT (CHOICE OF liabilities relating to current claims to Comcare. SUPERANNUATION FUNDS) BILL 2005 Following this, the Consequential and Transi- tional Provisions Bill will transfer any remaining TAX LAWS AMENDMENT (2005 liabilities of SIFC to the Commonwealth. MEASURES No. 3) BILL 2005 Once the liabilities have been transferred, Sched- First Reading ule 2 of the Consequential and Transitional Provi- Bills received from the House of Repre- sions Bill will repeal the following Acts: the Ste- sentatives. vedoring Industry Finance Committee Act 1977, the Stevedoring Industry Levy Act 1977, and the Senator ABETZ (Tasmania—Special Stevedoring Industry Levy Collection Act 1977. Minister of State) (4.24 pm)—I indicate to Asbestos-related liabilities which were transferred the Senate that these bills are being intro- from SIFC to the Commonwealth will then be duced together. After debate on the motion capable of being automatically transferred to for the second reading has been adjourned, I Comcare under the transfer provisions of the will be moving a motion to have the bills main Bill. listed separately on the Notice Paper. I As the Committee will no longer perform any move: other functions after the transferral of liabilities for asbestos-related claims to Comcare, it is ap- propriate to repeal the relevant legislation. The

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 77 stevedoring industry levy collection Acts have aged by Comcare and the Department of Veter- been redundant for several years. ans’ Affairs. There will also be consequential amendments to Integrating the management of asbestos claims the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act against the Government will lead to more consis- 1988 to take account of Comcare’s new function tent decision making and more equitable and effi- in managing asbestos-related common law cient outcomes. It will result in a standardised claims. approach to management of asbestos claims. Fur- ————— thermore, it will facilitate a better understanding of the nature of asbestos claims through improved ASBESTOS-RELATED CLAIMS knowledge and experience. The long latency pe- (MANAGEMENT OF COMMONWEALTH riod for asbestos-related diseases warrants special LIABILITIES) BILL 2005 consideration for managing resulting personal The Asbestos-related Claims (Management of injury claims. Commonwealth Liabilities) Bill 2005 will allow The Government’s asbestos liabilities over the Comcare to manage all asbestos-related claims next 50 years have been estimated to be $0.9 bil- brought at common law against the Government. lion, the majority of which will be common law It will achieve this by transferring the liability for claims. Comcare will be fully funded for the cost such claims from the Commonwealth and Com- of managing the claims. While the Government’s monwealth authorities to Comcare. 2005-06 Budget proposals provided $86 million Currently, the majority of common law asbestos to the Employment and Workplace Relations port- claims against the Government are managed by folio over a five year period for the costs of as- the particular agencies against which the claims bestos claims, this bill is not expected to have a are made. This has resulted in some inefficiencies significant effect on the level of asbestos liabili- and inconsistencies in case management across ties. portfolios. ————— Comcare’s current legislative authority allows it IMPORT PROCESSING CHARGES to manage asbestos-related disease claims from AMENDMENT BILL 2005 only current and former employees of the Gov- ernment, and their dependants. This bill is the first of two in the legislative pack- age for the restructure of the cost recovery regime The bill will give Comcare the legislative author- for import related services which was originally ity to manage common law claims against the proposed to support the new management and Government by contractors, tenants, bystanders, processing of cargo by customs. Cost recovery for etc. Comcare will also have the authority to man- import related services has been in place since age claims from former waterside workers whose 1997. asbestos claims are currently managed by the Stevedoring Industry Finance Committee. This bill provides the legislative authority to re- structure the import declaration and the ware- It is proposed that Defence-related common law house declaration processing charges contained in asbestos claims will continue to be managed by the Import Processing Charges Act 2001 (the IPC the Department of Defence, at the delegation of Act 2001). The structure under the existing IPC Comcare, pending a review of these arrangements Act 2001 is based on the value of imported goods by July 2006. and applies the same charge irrespective of the Statutory claims made under the Safety, Compen- method of importation. It is proposed to change sation and Rehabilitation Act 1988, the Veterans’ this structure and instead base the charges on the Entitlements Act 1986 and the Military Rehabili- method of importation, either by sea, air or post tation and Compensation Act 2004 are not in- without reference to the value of the imported cluded in the application of this bill, and claims goods. This new structure will be the same as the made under these Acts will continue to be man- original charging structure currently operating under the Import Processing Charges Act 1997. In

CHAMBER 78 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 addition, the second bill in this package will re- would apply to two million low value consign- peal two cargo reporting charges relating to low ments in the financial year 2005-06. These con- value consignments, which will be incorporated signments would predominantly be imported by into the restructured import declaration and ware- air. Both of these charges will be repealed, result- house declaration processing charges. ing in cost reductions in the administrative burden Consultation with industry in relation to the re- placed on the importing community and signifi- structuring proposal has occurred. Industry repre- cant savings for importers of low value consign- sentatives support the requirement to restructure ments. the charges as proposed and also support the Industry agrees with elimination of these two amalgamation of the charges for low value con- charges and there incorporation into the import signments into the import declaration and ware- declaration and warehouse declaration processing house declaration processing charges. charges. As previously stated this bill will ensure that the As already stated, this package will streamline the charges are equitable in their application to the Customs cost recovery regime and significantly users of import processing services. reduce administrative complexity. ————— ————— CUSTOMS LEGISLATION AMENDMENT SUPERANNUATION BILL 2005 (IMPORT PROCESSING CHARGES) BILL The Superannuation Bill 2005 (the bill), together 2005 with the Superannuation (Consequential Amend- This bill is the second of two in the legislative ments) Bill 2005 (the Consequential Bill), will package for the restructure of the cost recovery provide for the separation of the Public Sector regime for import related services. Superannuation Accumulation Plan, the PSSAP, This bill provides the legislative authority to re- from the Public Sector Superannuation Scheme, peal the self assessed clearance declaration charge the PSS. and the screening charge. These charges apply to The bill will also provide a framework for Austra- the processing of low value consignments that do lian Government employers to offer employees not require an import declaration or a warehouse and office holders with choice of fund. declaration. The costs associated with the proc- The PSSAP will be established as a fully funded essing of these low value consignments will be accumulation scheme for new Australian Gov- incorporated into the charges being amended by ernment employees and office holders and certain the first Bill of this package. These amendments other persons from 1 July 2005. It was established are consistent with Commonwealth cost recovery as a sub plan of the PSS by the 20th Amending guidelines whereby charges that detract from Deed, which amended the Trust Deed and Rules administrative simplicity are eliminated thus en- under the Superannuation Act 1990. hancing the cost effectiveness of the total Cus- toms cost recovery regime. The bill will provide for the PSSAP to commence as a scheme separate from the PSS. This will al- Since introduction of the current cost recovery low it to operate on the same basis as similar su- regime in 1997, Customs has consulted with in- perannuation schemes. dustry on a regular basis under the auspices of the While it exists as part of the PSS, the PSSAP Customs National Consultative Committee. The Committee comprises representatives from the must operate within the framework of a largely unfunded defined benefit scheme, rather than a various sectors of the importing community. Due to industry concerns raised in the Committee and framework appropriate for a fully funded accu- mulation scheme. This requires it to include fea- in other forums in relation to the charges imposed on low value consignments, the Government has tures that are not usual for accumulation schemes decided to streamline the total charging package. Although the PSSAP will be separate from the PSS, the PSS Board will continue to be responsi- It is projected that the self assessed clearance declaration charge and the screening charge ble for the PSSAP and the Commissioner for Su-

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 79 perannuation will continue to provide administra- tion Scheme (CSS) or the PSS, for example tive services to the Board in respect of the new where a person has a PSS preserved benefit. scheme. The PSS Board will also be responsible Those employees will continue to be eligible to for the new PSSAP Fund established by the bill. join those schemes as appropriate. Like the PSS, the Rules for the PSSAP will be ————— provided for by Trust Deed. Following the pas- SUPERANNUATION (CONSEQUENTIAL sage of the bill a new Trust Deed and Rules will AMENDMENTS) BILL 2005 be made for the PSSAP in essentially the same The Superannuation (Consequential Amend- form as the existing Rules for the PSSAP as a sub plan of the PSS. ments) Bill 2005 (the bill) will amend eight Acts and the Trust Deed under the Superannuation Act It is intended that Australian Government em- 1990 as a consequence of the establishment of the ployees and office holders will be treated in the Public Sector Superannuation Accumulation Plan, separate superannuation scheme in the same way the PSSAP, as a separate superannuation scheme as they would have been treated in the sub plan of and will allow Australian Government employees the PSS and employer contributions will be pay- and office holders to have choice of fund. The able in the same circumstances. Superannuation Bill 2005 will establish the However the bill, together with the Consequential PSSAP as a separate scheme from the Public Sec- Bill, will require new Australian Government tor Superannuation Scheme, the PSS. employees and office holders to be given choice The Superannuation Act 1990, which provides for of fund arrangements from 1 July 2006. Their the PSS, will confirm that the PSS will close to employer may also offer them choice of fund new employees from 1 July 2005 with the com- from as early as 1 July 2005. This framework will mencement of the PSSAP. provide them with unprecedented flexibility for investing their superannuation savings and will The Superannuation Guarantee (Administration) address the rigid arrangements currently in place Act 1992 is being amended to allow Australian where membership of one scheme is mandated Government employers to comply with the choice for most employees. of fund requirements until 1 July 2006 in respect of employees who are PSSAP members. From From 1 July 2006, Australian Government em- that date, employers will be required to meet the ployers will be required to comply with the choice of fund requirements in respect of new choice requirements of the Superannuation Guar- employees in the same manner as most private antee (Administration) Act 1992 Act (SG Act), sector employers. like most private sector employers. The Superannuation (Productivity Benefit) Act The legislation also provides that the PSSAP will 1988 provides for Superannuation Guarantee type be the employer (or default) fund for Australian contributions for Australian Government employ- Public Service employees and certain other pre- ees and office holders who are not Common- scribed persons who do not choose a fund. Other wealth Superannuation Scheme or PSS members. employers will have the flexibility to nominate The bill will amend that Act so that it does not the PSSAP or another appropriate complying apply to new employees and office holders from superannuation fund or Retirement Savings Ac- 1 July 2006. Superannuation will be provided for count in these circumstances. these persons as agreed with their employer sub- The proposed changes do not affect existing Aus- ject to employers providing contributions at least tralian Government employees at 30 June 2005, in accordance with the Superannuation Guarantee including those employees who are members of (Administration) Act 1992. Also, these employees the Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme or and office holders may join the PSSAP if eligible the PSS. to do so. Also the arrangements will not generally affect The bill will also amend the Productivity Benefit those new employees who have an existing rele- Act to ensure that the Act does not apply in re- vant interest in the Commonwealth Superannua- spect of PSSAP members who have chosen to

CHAMBER 80 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 cease PSSAP membership in accordance with the A significant boost to superannuation savings was choice of fund arrangements. also provided in the 2004-05 budget, which con- The Governor-General Act 1974 and the Judges’ tained incentives to save for retirement worth Pensions Act 1968 are being amended as a conse- $2.8 billion over four years, including an expan- quence of the closure of the Productivity Benefit sion of the co-contribution scheme and further Act to new employees. The amendments provide reductions in the superannuation surcharge rates. safety net Superannuation Guarantee minimum More recently, the government has secured the support to the Governor-General and Judges in passage of legislation to deliver choice of fund rare circumstances where the benefit otherwise and reconfirmed its commitment to the superan- payable would be less than the Superannuation nuation contribution splitting policy. Unfortu- Guarantee minimum employer superannuation. nately, both of these measures had been held up in the Senate during the last term of the last parlia- The bill makes minor amendments to the Super- ment. In the 2002-03 budget, the government annuation Benefits (Supervisory Mechanisms) announced that the superannuation surcharge Act 1990, the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 would be reduced at the rate of 1½ per cent per and the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 and to annum from 2002-03 so that it would have re- the Trust Deed PSS. These amendments concern duced to 10.5 per cent in 2004-05. Unfortunately, the establishment of the PSSAP as a separate that reduction was opposed in the Senate and the scheme. The Superannuation Benefits (Supervi- government was only able to secure through the sory Mechanisms) Act 1990 also includes minor Senate a reduction to 13½ per cent in 2004-05. In amendments to allow Australian Government the 2004-05 budget, however, the government employers to provide employees with choice of announced a policy to reduce the superannuation funds. surcharge, at a rate of 2½ per cent per annum, to ————— 12½ per cent in 2004-05 and reducing to 7½ per SUPERANNUATION LAWS AMENDMENT cent in 2006-07. Again, unfortunately, opposition (ABOLITION OF SURCHARGE) BILL 2005 from the Labor Party in the Senate prevented the Over the past few years the government has made reduction as announced in that budget. The gov- a number of significant announcements and im- ernment undertook at the last election to reduce plemented a number of important measures aimed further the maximum surcharge rates. at improving the superannuation and retirement In pursuance of the policy that we took to the last income arrangements for all Australians. These election, the government has now reviewed the changes have demonstrated the government’s superannuation surcharge. The government now commitment to assisting Australians to build fi- proposes to remove this impost on superannuation nancial self-reliance for their retirement. Initia- savings and abolish the surcharge payable on tives announced in the 2001 policy statement A individual surchargeable contributions and rele- Better Superannuation System have enhanced the vant termination payments with effect from 1 July overall attractiveness, accessibility and security of 2005. Approximately 600,000 Australians will superannuation. This included the introduction of receive a boost to their superannuation savings as the co-contribution scheme for eligible low- a result of this measure. It is estimated to cost income earners who make voluntary superannua- $2.5 billion over the forward estimates. The su- tion contributions, and reductions in superannua- perannuation surcharge was introduced in 1996 at tion surcharge rates. The policy paper A More a time when the budget was deeply in deficit as a Flexible and Adaptable Retirement Income Sys- result of Labor’s economic mismanagement. It tem, released on 25 February 2004, outlined fur- was introduced in 1996 in part to drive the budget ther measures to improve the accessibility, flexi- back into balance. The government laid down a bility and integrity of the retirement income sys- policy in 1996 to drive the budget back into bal- tem and to reduce red tape. This included the ance from a $10.3 billion deficit which the Labor removal of work tests for individuals under the Party had left in place. age of 65 who wanted to contribute to superannu- ation.

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 81

After bringing down 10 budgets and eight sur- The amendments will apply to the 2004-05 year pluses this measure is no longer required to keep of income and later years of income. Full details the budget in balance. Accordingly, the govern- of the measures in this bill are contained in the ment is moving in this parliament to abolish it explanatory memorandum. I commend this bill. from 1 July 2005. As I said, 600,000 Australians ————— will receive a boost to their superannuation sav- ings as a result of this measure. The measure pre- AGED CARE AMENDMENT (EXTRA sented in this bill will also provide incentives for SERVICE) BILL 2005 individuals to make additional voluntary savings This bill demonstrates the Government’s strong through the superannuation system and simplify commitment to ensuring a robust and viable aged the operation of the superannuation system. care sector for the future where the element of This will be a major improvement in terms of choice is a key ingredient for both residents and providers of aged care services. This bill imple- reducing complexity. The government, when it looked at reducing the rates, as it had tried to do ments one of the measures from the Australian Government’s 2005-06 Budget package. in the 2002-03 budget, was minded of the fact that as the rates reduced, and therefore the reve- Expansion of the Extra Service program will al- nue raised by it reduced, the administration costs low the sector to respond to rising consumer ex- as a proportion increased, because there is quite pectations through providing residents with in- some considerable complexity in the administra- creased choice in relation to hotel-type services. tion of a superannuation surcharge. That is, ad- At the same time, removing the requirement to ministration and compliance costs which may renew Extra Service status after five years will have been justified by a rate of 15 per cent could both decrease red tape for providers and increase no longer be sustained at lower rates and as a their ability to access capital for rebuilding or consequence it makes sense to abolish the super- refurbishing. annuation surcharge in its entirety. The individual needs of older Australians remain The bill that I have commended will do that. We this Government’s priority. This measure seeks to look forward to support from all sides of politics increase the opportunity for consumer choice in in the abolition of the superannuation surcharge. I residential aged care through the further reform of commend the Superannuation Laws Amendment the Extra Service program. An aged care service (Abolition of Surcharge) Bill 2005. with Extra Service status allows residents to ————— choose, and pay for, a higher than average level of hotel-type services, including accommodation, TAX LAWS AMENDMENT (MEDICARE the range and quality of food and the provision of LEVY AND MEDICARE LEVY SURCHARGE) non-care services such as recreational and per- BILL 2005 sonal interest activities. This bill will increase the Medicare levy low in- While Government programs, including accredi- come thresholds for individuals and families in tation and certification, have raised significantly line with increases in the consumer price index. the standards of care and accommodation, Extra The low income threshold in the Medicare levy Service offers greater choice in non-care related surcharge provisions will similarly be increased. services. These changes will ensure that low income indi- The Australian Government is committed to en- viduals and families will continue not to have to suring that the aged care sector is capable of de- pay the Medicare levy or surcharge. livering high quality and affordable care to older The bill will also increase the Medicare levy low Australians. In this bill it removes a significant income threshold for pensioners below age pen- impediment to expansion of the Extra Service sion age to ensure that where these pensioners do program in aged care by removing some of the not have a tax liability they will also not have a red tape involved. Medicare levy liability. Aged care providers have long felt that the high level of Government regulation of the Extra Ser-

CHAMBER 82 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 vice program has stymied its expansion. In par- equipment that enhance the comfort and amenity ticular, they have singled out the requirement that of residents. Services may choose to focus on they have to reapply for Extra Service status delivering higher standards of amenity for those every five years—notwithstanding that during residents who elect to pay for these higher stan- those five years they may have had no complaints dards. and no problems with compliance. The process of Growing demand, as the population ages, means reapplying for Extra Service status is not only that we must ensure that the aged care sector is time-consuming and expensive, because it in- sustainable over the long term. The challenge is to volves looking at each and every “extra” service balance cost-sharing with equity of access, while which is offered by the particular home, but pre- continuing to improve the quality of care and the vents long-term planning in relation to the capital fabric of the buildings in which such care is de- needs of the home and may act as a deterrent to livered. financiers and other investors. This measure, in allowing certainty for Extra Ser- Considerable investment in infrastructure is vice providers and increasing their access to capi- needed over the next decade to ensure the supply tal, will ultimately allow increased choice for and quality of aged care homes grows in line with consumers. This will not come at the expense of the increase in the number of older Australians people who cannot afford to pay. The current who need care. The Australian Government rec- limit of a maximum of 15 per cent of residential ognises that over the next decade there will be a aged care places in each State or Territory will continuing need for capital funding so that exist- remain to ensure that access to care is not affected ing homes can be well maintained, new homes for people who cannot afford to pay for Extra built and existing facilities refurbished. Service or do not desire such extra services. The ability of the aged care industry to make this These changes are the result of the government investment will depend on its ability to raise capi- listening to and responding to address these is- tal. The Report on the Review of Pricing Ar- sues. We have acted in a timely and sensitive way rangements in Aged Care by Professor Warren to keep the benefits of the aged care reforms Hogan noted that there were significant levels of flowing to older Australians now and into the investment in new buildings and upgrading older future. buildings. It was reported that in 2002-03, $821.4 million of new building, refurbishment and up- ————— grading work in aged care was completed, involv- CIVIL AVIATION AMENDMENT BILL 2005 ing an estimated 22.8 per cent of all residential The Civil Aviation Amendment Bill (the bill) will aged care services. A further $2 billion of build- make a number of amendments to the Civil Avia- ing work was completed or underway in 2003-04 tion Act 1988 (the Act). with 25 per cent of all homes planning new work. Firstly, this bill will amend the Governor- The Australian Government has invested almost General’s regulation-making power to allow regu- $1 billion in aged care homes for capital im- lations to be made that are inconsistent with the provements or as increases in subsidy payments. Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (DDA) and This included over $513 million (or $3,500 per the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (SDA), if the resident) as a one-off payment to providers of inconsistency is necessary for aviation safety. residential services in recognition of the forward In terms of allowing existing and future regula- plan for improved building standards for aged tions to be inconsistent with the SDA, the bill will care homes. limit this inconsistency to regulations relating to Aged care providers have argued that a lack of medical standards, where necessary for aviation access to capital has been an impediment to the safety. For example, there may be a need to im- expansion of the Extra Service program. As well pose special conditions on pregnant pilots in their as building new homes, capital can be used to final trimester, to minimise any risk to aviation upgrade existing aged care homes to better pro- safety arising as a result of sudden complications. vide quality buildings, furniture, fittings and

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 83

On the other hand, in terms of allowing existing These elements of the bill re-introduce the con- and future regulations to be inconsistent with the tent of the Civil Aviation (Relationship with Anti- DDA, the inconsistency will unavoidably need to Discrimination Legislation) Bill 2004, which be broader. For example, passengers sitting next lapsed with the August 2004 dissolution of Par- to aircraft emergency exits should not be suffer- liament. ing from any disability which would render them The amendments will allow Australia to harmo- incapable of opening the exit hatch in an emer- nise its aviation safety regulations with interna- gency. Aircraft must conform to onerous design tional standards and meet its international obliga- standards which may, in a limited number of tions as a member State of the International Civil cases, render them incapable of being modified to Aviation Organization. provide unassisted access for some disabled pas- The bill will also insert a reference note into both sengers. These types of provisions are important the DDA and the SDA to inform members of the for aviation safety, and should not be construed as public about the amendments to the Governor- being unlawfully discriminatory. General’s regulation-making power that this bill The bill also includes provisions that put beyond is introducing. doubt the validity of existing regulations and past Lastly, the bill will make a range of minor techni- actions based on those regulations. This amend- cal amendments that will correct errors and stan- ment is necessary to clarify existing uncertainty dardise references in the Act in relation to aircraft in relation to the validity of actions carried out in that are registered in countries other than Austra- accordance with existing safety regulations where lia. The amendments will also create a require- such actions may appear to have been inconsis- ment in the Act that the holders of an Air Opera- tent with either the DDA or the SDA. tor Certificate (AOC) must continue to satisfy However, the amendments regarding inconsis- CASA that they meet the conditions in their AOC. tency with the DDA and SDA, build in a consul- At present, this requirement is included in a Civil tation mechanism requiring the Civil Aviation Aviation Order and it is more appropriate for it to Safety Authority to consult the Human Rights and be included in the provisions relating to AOCs Equal Opportunity Commission in the preparation that are in the Act. These amendments were being of future regulations that contain provisions that progressed under the Civil Aviation Legislation are inconsistent with the DDA and the SDA. This Amendment (Mutual Recognition with New Zea- was a recommendation of the Senate Legal and land and Other Matters) Bill 2003 which also Constitutional References and Legislation Com- lapsed when Parliament was prorogued on mittee that conducted an inquiry into the bill in 31 August 2004. June 2004. Each one of the amendments in this bill is testi- In addition, regulations which have the potential mony to the Government’s commitment to meas- to be inconsistent with the DDA and SDA will be ured reform which ensures efficient and effective subject to clearance by the Human Rights Branch regulation, accessibility and a world class stan- of the Attorney-General’s Department, and will dard of safety for operators and consumers alike. undergo comprehensive consultation and Parlia- mentary scrutiny. ————— CRIMES AMENDMENT BILL 2005 Although the Government acknowledges that these amendments will allow inconsistency be- This bill amends the Crimes Act 1914 to enable tween aviation safety regulations and anti- Commonwealth participating agencies to request discrimination legislation, it is the Government’s assumed identity documents from State and Terri- belief that any such regulations will not be unnec- tory issuing agencies in accordance with legisla- essarily restrictive or discriminatory, especially tion in force in those jurisdictions. when viewed in the context of the Government’s Assumed identities are false identities adopted to obligation to protect the safety of flight crew, facilitate intelligence and investigative functions, fare-paying passengers, other aircraft and people or the infiltration of a criminal, hostile or insecure on the ground.

CHAMBER 84 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 environment with a view to collecting informa- nity Pharmacy Authority (the ACPA), whose role tion and investigating offences. is to consider applications by pharmacists to sup- Under the current provisions of the Crimes Act, ply PBS medicines, and to make recommenda- officers from specified Commonwealth and State tions as to whether or not an application be ap- agencies, such as the Australian Federal Police, proved. the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation In making its recommendations, the ACPA must and the police forces of each State, may acquire comply with a set of rules determined by the Min- evidence of an assumed identity from a Com- ister for Health and Ageing, in accordance with monwealth agency. the Act. These rules, known as the Pharmacy Lo- This covers documentation such as passports and cation Rules, prescribe location-based criteria Medicare cards. which must be satisfied in order for a pharmacist to obtain approval to supply PBS medicines from However, the acquisition of evidence of identity particular premises. from the States and Territories such as birth cer- tificates and drivers licences has generally pro- The provisions for the Pharmacy Location Rules ceeded in the absence of a legislative framework. and the ACPA will cease to operate after 30 June 2005. Most States and Territories are now in the process of considering the enactment of legislation to The bill amends the Act to provide for the Phar- regulate the acquisition and use of evidence of macy Location Rules and their administration by assumed identities. the ACPA to continue to operate until 31 Decem- ber 2005. Victoria has enacted their legislation and may look to commence the provisions in July. In accordance with a commitment made in the Third Community Pharmacy Agreement between It is therefore necessary to make consequential the Commonwealth and the Pharmacy Guild of amendments to the Commonwealth legislation to Australia, a joint review of the Pharmacy Loca- ensure that our Commonwealth agencies are able tion Rules is being undertaken. to access evidence from State authorities in ac- cordance with the legislation in each State or Ter- The review is expected to report before 30 June ritory. 2005, however, in order to allow Government time to consider the findings and recommenda- The amendments do not alter the provisions that tions of the review, the Government has decided control the use of assumed identities; existing to extend the existing arrangements until 31 De- requirements for authorisation, offences, and re- cember 2005. porting and accountability measures remain fully in place. The Pharmacy Location Rules currently in force will therefore remain in effect until 31 December The amendments do, however, reflect the recogni- 2004, and the Australian Community Pharmacy tion that crime knows no boundaries and law en- Authority will continue to administer them. forcement and national security agencies are con- tinually having to work in a cooperative matter to This bill also makes a technical amendment to the detect and eliminate criminal activity. Health Legislation Amendment (Podiatric Sur- gery and Other Matters) Act 2004 to correct a ————— misdescription. HEALTH LEGISLATION AMENDMENT ————— (AUSTRALIAN COMMUNITY PHARMACY AUTHORITY) BILL 2005 HIGHER EDUCATION LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (2005 MEASURES No. 2) BILL This bill amends the National Health Act 1953 to 2005 extend the existing arrangements for approving pharmacists to supply medicines subsidised under I am pleased to announce that the major compo- the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS). nents of the Higher Education Support Act 2003 have come into effect as of 1 January this year. The National Health Act 1953 currently provides The reforms contained in the new legislative for the establishment of the Australian Commu-

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 85 framework give universities access to the funding flexibility to deal with changes in demand and they need to deliver world-class higher education, supply for particular courses or units of study. with a focus on quality learning outcomes. Laying The changes will enable providers to publish the foundation for this is an increase in public more than one schedule of student contribution investment in the sector of around $2.6 billion amounts and tuition fees per year, and specify over five years from 2004. The Australian Gov- more than one date for the publishing of Census ernment will provide some $11 billion over ten Date and Equivalent Full Time Student Load val- years in new support for the higher education ues. sector from 2004. The bill also includes technical amendments to There will be almost 36,000 new Commonwealth the Higher Education Support Act 2003 and the supported student places added to the higher edu- Taxation Administration Act 1953 which clarify cation sector over the next five years and more the tax file number requirements for students. funding for each Commonwealth supported stu- These amendments will build on the implementa- dent, linked to improvements in how universities tion of the new arrangements under Our Universi- are managed. In addition, there are extra funds for ties: Backing Australia’s Future package of re- regional universities and new schemes and fund- forms. ing to encourage excellence in teaching, more collaboration between institutions and a renewed Full details of the measures in the bill are con- tained in the explanatory memorandum circulated focus on equity. There will also be new places for the National Priority areas of nursing and teach- to honourable senators. ing and special fee arrangements to encourage I commend the bill to the Senate. people to enrol in these fields. ————— The benefits to the Australian higher education INDIGENOUS EDUCATION (TARGETED system will become increasingly apparent as stu- ASSISTANCE) AMENDMENT BILL 2005 dents and higher education providers take full The primary purpose of this bill is to amend the advantage of the opportunities that the reforms Indigenous Education (Targeted Assistance) Act provide. 2000 to appropriate additional funding to support The Australian Government is taking this oppor- the provision of high quality tutorial assistance to tunity to make a number of technical revisions to Indigenous students who move away from their refine and enhance the effective implementation remote community to attend school. of the Act and give certainty to higher education The Australian Government places great impor- providers and students. tance on achieving better educational outcomes This bill now before us will, in particular, enable for Indigenous students. It is strategically target- higher education providers to respond to changes ing funding to maximise school performance and in student demand in a more flexible way. They to more heavily support Indigenous students of also ensure that students are properly informed greatest disadvantage—those from remote areas. and protected about decisions made by higher For many Indigenous children in remote areas, education providers which affect them. their best chance for educational success is to Included in the bill are a series of measures de- leave their community and attend a school in a signed to clarify the requirements for the review non-remote location. For some Indigenous chil- of decisions made by higher education providers dren, it is the only option they have. This transi- in relation to students. The amendments will en- tion can however be difficult. Failure to keep pace sure that providers have clear advice on their re- with peers academically can be a key reason for sponsibilities, and students will be well informed Indigenous students not settling into a new school of their rights and the procedure they need to or dropping out of school early and returning to follow if they wish to seek a review of a decision. their community. Students from remote communi- The bill also includes amendments to the Act ties require significant levels of support to make which will give higher education providers more an effective transition.

CHAMBER 86 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

The new funding appropriated by this bill will very real threats. It is in this context that I present provide Indigenous students from remote com- this bill for the Parliament’s consideration. munities with tutorial support in their first year of Maritime security is under constant review to schooling when they move to a non-remote loca- ensure that measures remain appropriate given tion to continue their education. These students current intelligence threats to the Australian mari- will receive up to four hours tuition per week for time industry. During 2004 a review of maritime up to 32 weeks in their first year away from security was undertaken and a range of measures home. to further strengthen Australia’s preventative Between 2006 and 2008, this extra tutorial assis- maritime security arrangements were recom- tance will help an estimated 2,040 students under- mended. take and complete their schooling. This included the establishment of a special task- A further purpose of this bill is to facilitate im- force to undertake a comprehensive review of the proved vocational education and training ar- security arrangements for offshore oil and gas rangements for Indigenous Australians. The move facilities, and the introduction of the Maritime to a new national training system from 1 July Security Identification Card (MSIC). The MSIC 2005 and the negotiation of a new Common- will be issued to persons requiring unmonitored wealth-State vocational education and training access to maritime security zones on completion funding agreement with States and Territories of satisfactory background checks. present us with a valuable opportunity to make The Maritime Transport Security Amendment Bill significant improvements to the economic, social 2005 has two parts. The first part will security and personal lives of Indigenous Australians. regulate Australia’s offshore oil and gas industry, The bill will transfer $3.7 million per year from and is necessary for the protection of offshore oil appropriations under the Act to the Common- and gas industry personnel, to safeguard oil and wealth-State Agreement for Skilling Australia’s gas supplies, and for the protection of offshore oil Workforce to establish a joint funding pool to and gas infrastructure. The second part introduces improve outcomes for Indigenous Australians. a range of minor amendments to support the in- This funding is currently provided to four Inde- troduction of the MSIC Scheme. pendent Indigenous vocational education and There is evidence to suggest that Australia’s off- training providers as transitional assistance under shore oil and gas industry is a potential terrorist the Indigenous Education Strategic Initiatives target. Indeed, in newspaper reports this year the Programme. By transferring this funding to the following statement appeared: new Commonwealth-State funding agreement, In 2002, Ubeid al-Qurashi, a pseudonym of States and Territories will be required to match an Osama Bin Laden lieutenant, wrote an ar- the funding. ticle saying that Western economies cannot This initiative will provide funding certainty for stand high oil prices. One way to strike fear the life of the Agreement to providers that are into the West, he wrote is by repeated attacks achieving good outcomes for Indigenous clients, on oil installations or on tankers. After the at- allowing them to establish sustainable services. It tack on the French tanker Limburg, in Octo- will link ongoing funding to improved perform- ber 2002, the al-Qa’eda political bureau de- ance and outcomes for Indigenous clients. scribed the attack as not merely an attack on I commend the bill to the Senate. a tanker. Rather, al-Qaeda said, it was an at- tack against international transport lines and ————— an attack on the West’s commercial lifeline, MARITIME TRANSPORT SECURITY petroleum. AMENDMENT BILL 2005 In addition, in April 2004 terrorists attacked two It is a reality that national security remains a high offshore oil facilities south of the Iraqi city of priority for this Government. It is essential that Basra, using multiple boat borne explosives. we continue to protect the maritime industry from Three coalition sailors died intercepting this at-

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 87 tack. Al-Qa’ida has recently threatened to target industry. Offshore oil and gas industry partici- western economies, including the oil and gas in- pants will be required to submit security plans dustry. There is therefore a need for the imple- that consider the practical needs of the operators, mentation of effective security measures to limit as well as the special nature and location of indi- the capacity of terrorists to adversely affect the vidual facilities. These security plans will need to Australian offshore oil and gas industry. be based on the findings of offshore facility site The potential impacts of a terrorist attack on an specific security risk assessments, and should Australian offshore oil and gas facility include complement, rather than duplicate existing man- economic loss, loss of life, and the disruption of agement and safety plans. Australia’s domestic and international oil and gas The Department of Transport and Regional Ser- supplies. The annual contribution of the oil and vices will be responsible for regulating the off- gas sector to the Australian economy exceeds 18 shore oil and gas industry’s security arrange- billion dollars. Victorian industrial and residential ments. Offshore oil and gas industry participants gas supplies were interrupted for two weeks, fol- will be required to submit security plans to the lowing the 1998 Longford gas explosion. The Department of Transport and Regional Services impact of this disaster and the substantial contri- for approval. This Department will also be re- bution of the oil and gas sector to the Australian sponsible for auditing offshore oil and gas facili- economy emphasise the need for the implementa- ties to ensure these facilities are compliant with tion of appropriate offshore oil and gas preventive the requirements set out in their approved security security measures. plans. Given the intent and potential capability terrorist Like maritime industry participants, offshore oil groups have to target offshore oil and gas facili- and gas industry participants will be responsible ties, the Australian Government decided to estab- for funding the security measures specified in lish the Taskforce on Offshore Maritime Security. their security plans. The Australian Government This taskforce reviewed the security arrange- recognises this may impose costs on offshore oil ments of offshore oil and gas facilities. In De- and gas facility operators, however given the cember 2004, following the recommendations of global security environment, these costs are now that Taskforce, the Australian Government an- part of the cost of doing business. nounced it would be extending the Maritime Now, moving on to the Maritime Security Identity Transport Security Act 2003; to security regulate Card. Currently there are no legislative require- Australia’s offshore oil and gas industry. ments to check the background of people working The Maritime Transport Security Amendment Bill in Australian Ports, Ships and Offshore Oil and 2005 security regulates offshore oil and gas facili- Gas Facilities, as is the case in the Aviation Indus- ties located within the boundaries of Australia’s try. The MSIC Scheme will provide the maritime territorial sea, the Exclusive Economic Zone and and offshore sectors, with assurance that person- the continental shelf. The bill applies to offshore nel requiring unmonitored access to sensitive oil and gas facilities used in the extraction of oil areas have met background checking require- and gas, including fixed production platforms, ments. and floating production and storage facilities. The Whilst the current provisions in the Maritime bill also security regulates offshore oil and gas Transport Security Act 2003 provides the power service providers, such as helicopter and supply to make most of the regulations required to intro- vessel operators servicing offshore oil and gas duce and implement the MSIC Scheme, the facilities. The security regulation of offshore oil Amendment Bill clarifies and makes explicit two and gas facilities will contribute to the secure aspects of the scheme. The bill ensures that any transit of security regulated ships currently inter- reasonable costs incurred by MSIC Issuing Bod- acting with offshore oil and gas facilities. ies in the issue and production of an MSIC can be The Maritime Transport Security Amendment Bill recovered. 2005 establishes an outcomes based security The second amendment enables regulation mak- framework for Australia’s offshore oil and gas ing powers in the disclosure of information be-

CHAMBER 88 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 tween entities involved in coordinating and con- Information released by the Reserve Bank shows ducting background checks of applicants for the that these reforms have delivered significant re- purpose of determining if a person is eligible to ductions in credit card merchant service fees. hold an MSIC. This has resulted in an estimated annual saving to The Maritime Transport Security Amendment Bill business of over $500 million. 2005 is vital for the protection of Australia’s off- This amount is $100 million more than originally shore oil and gas infrastructure, the protection of forecast. offshore oil and gas industry personnel, and for Consumers can expect the benefits of these sav- ensuring the uninterrupted supply of Australian ings to flow through due to the competitive nature oil and gas to both the domestic and international of Australian retailing. energy markets. The bill also includes amend- ments to support the introduction of the MSIC The purpose of this bill is to ensure that financial Scheme. The MSIC Scheme will require maritime institutions will not contravene the competition and offshore oil and gas personnel to undergo provisions in Part IV of the Trade Practices Act background checking before they can be granted 1974 by complying with the Reserve Bank’s unmonitored access to maritime security zones. standards for credit card interchange fees. ————— It does this by specifically authorising conduct PAYMENT SYSTEMS (REGULATION) carried out in compliance with the Reserve Bank standards. AMENDMENT BILL 2005 An exemption from Part IV of the Trade Practices The Payment Systems (Regulation) Act 1998 sets Act is currently contained in the Payment Sys- out the regulatory framework governing the op- tems (Regulation) Regulations 2003. eration of Australia’s payments system. However, it will cease to operate after 30 June The Act allows the Reserve Bank to designate a 2005. payment system where this is in the public inter- est. This bill provides a permanent replacement for the current regulations. Designation of a payment system allows the Re- serve Bank to establish rules of access for partici- It would also enable a similar authorisation to be pants, determine standards, give enforceable di- extended to conduct carried out in compliance rections to participants and arbitrate disputes on with Reserve Bank standards for other payment technical standards. systems, such as EFTPOS or Visa Debit, in the event that such standards are made. The Reserve Bank has used its powers under the Act to establish standards for interchange fees for The amendments contained in this bill are techni- the credit card schemes operated by Visa, cal in nature. MasterCard and Bankcard. They do not represent a change in Government These standards came into effect on 1 July 2003. policy. The Reserve Bank’s reforms to the credit card The bill will provide ongoing commercial cer- payments system have three objectives. tainty for payments system participants. Firstly, they aim to ensure that fees charged to I commend the bill. merchants and consumers for credit card services ————— reflect the costs of their provision. PRIMARY INDUSTRIES (EXCISE) LEVIES Secondly, they aim to ensure that fees and charges AMENDMENT (RICE) BILL 2005 are transparent to the consumer. The primary purpose of this bill is to increase the Thirdly, they aim to promote competition be- existing maximum allowable rate for the rice tween credit card service providers. research and development (R&D) levy from $2 to $3 per tonne. This proposed increase has been progressed after a request from the rice industry.

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 89

The rice industry is now facing a third year of ————— significant drought related production downturns SEX DISCRIMINATION AMENDMENT which have placed financial pressures on the in- (TEACHING PROFESSION) BILL 2004 dustry’s R&D programmes due to subsequent The Government is committed to achieving the reductions in levy revenue. The rice industry is best education outcomes for male and female seeking an increase in the maximum allowable schools students throughout Australia. levy rate to provide them with the flexibility to better manage future fluctuations in levy revenue. A House of Representatives Inquiry into the edu- This will allow the industry to ensure adequate cation of boys in June 2003 Boys: Getting it Right funding is maintained for core R&D programmes. examined the problems particular to the education of boys. The Government believes that by using innova- tion to drive productivity growth and boost prof- That Report noted that boys are not achieving as itability on farms, Australia’s rural industries can well as girls across abroad spectrum of measures continue to play a key part in maintaining our of educational attainment. national prosperity. Australia’s rural industries The report identified significant public concern have also long recognised this principle and have about the decline in the number of male teachers shown a longstanding and widespread willingness in schools, in particular in primary schools, in to invest in innovation through industry-wide Australia, and expressed support for more men in levies. In this context the Government was happy schools. to put forward these changes to assist the rice The figures speak for themselves. industry manage their R&D programmes into the future and for producers to continue to take up In 2003, only 20.9 percent of primary teaching R&D outputs, whether they be to adopt new prac- staff in Australia were men. tices or bring out new products. This problem is only getting worse. The bill will also provide mechanisms for the In 2003, males constituted 26.5% of the 37,530 introduction of regulations for the implementation domestic students enrolled in initial teaching of the operative rate of the rice R&D levy. Cur- courses specifically for primary and secondary rently, changes to the rate of the levy are done teaching in Australia. through a Ministerial Declaration published in the In 2003, males were only 18.8 percent of domes- Gazette. This bill enables these functions to be tic students training to become primary school rolled into new regulations which will be tabled teachers. soon after this bill receives Royal Assent. By The Government’s Sex Discrimination Amend- switching to regulations it will bring the operation ment (Teaching Profession) Bill will assist in of the rice levy into line with the majority of other addressing the problem by amending the Sex primary industry levies. It will also provide a Discrimination Act 1984 to provide that a person greater level of scrutiny by Parliament than is may offer scholarships for persons of a particular available under the existing arrangements. gender in respect of participation in a teaching The Government will only favourably consider a course. request to raise the operative levy rate beyond the The section would apply only if the purpose of current $2 cap if the request demonstrates com- doing so is to redress a gender imbalance in pliance with the Government’s Levy Principles teaching, that is, an imbalance in the ratio of male and Guidelines. These guidelines include a re- to female teachers in schools in Australia, or in a quirement that there be widespread industry sup- category of schools or in a particular school. port for such a request. The current operative levy rate will not be affected by this bill. This Bill means that educational authorities and others can offer scholarships to encourage male This bill reflects the Government’s willingness to teachers into the profession in a manner consis- assist rural industries develop internal capacity to tent with the Sex Discrimination Act 1984. manage significant threats to ongoing sustainabil- ity, such as drought.

CHAMBER 90 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

The Bill is drafted in gender neutral language who cannot find a superannuation fund. This fa- which means that the amendments would allow cility is no longer needed, as Retirement Savings discrimination in favour of females if a gender Accounts (RSAs) offer similar low-cost benefits imbalance in favour of males were to emerge for employers. This bill will amend the legislation generally or in a region or sector. to make the Superannuation Holding Account The Government’s acknowledgement of the im- Special Account an eligible choice fund until 30 portance of both men and women in teaching in June 2006, giving employers a further year to our society, and the Government’s commitment to make arrangements to contribute to a superannua- encouraging men into the profession, will help to tion fund or retirement savings account. From change people’s perceptions about the role of men 1 July 2006, the Superannuation Holding Account in the profession for the future. Special Account will be closed to new employer deposits. Students throughout Australia will benefit from having both male and female role models in the This bill will amend the choice of fund legislation teaching profession. to specify additional circumstances where an em- ployer does not have to provide an employee with This Bill is a vital measure for addressing the the standard choice form, thus avoiding the impo- existing gender imbalance in the profession. sition of unnecessary cost on some employers. It complements the Government’s other major It is important that employees are not discouraged strategies for addressing the particular challenge from exercising their right to choose a fund of increasing education outcomes for boys, in- through the actions of their employer. This bill cluding: ensures that employers can not recoup part or all • Boys’ education is a priority area for the of the administrative costs associated with im- $159.2 million Australian Government Qual- plementing their choice of fund obligations by ity Teacher Program; and charging employees. • The provision of $27 million over six years The choice legislation ensures that fund trustees to 2008 for boys’ education, including over do not try to inappropriately induce employers to $19 million for the Success for Boys initia- move their employee’s contributions to the trus- tive, through which grants will be provided tee’s fund by offering them personal incentives. to 1600 schools to implement projects focus- This bill will make the Australian Securities and sing particularly on opportunities for boys to Investment Commission the agency that adminis- benefit from positive male role models, ters this provision. around $8 million already committed for ini- The bill clarifies a number of matters, such as the tiatives such as the Boys’ Education Light- test for whether a defined benefit fund is in sur- house Schools (BELS) initiative and research plus, the obligation on the employer to contribute into significant areas of education relevant to to the fund specified as the default fund on the boys’ education. standard choice form, and the choice of fund pen- ————— alty provisions. SUPERANNUATION LEGISLATION Full details of the measures in this bill are con- AMENDMENT (CHOICE OF tained in the explanatory memorandum. I com- SUPERANNUATION FUNDS) BILL 2005 mend this bill. This bill gives effect to announcements made by ————— the Government earlier this year to ease the tran- TAX LAWS AMENDMENT (2005 MEASURES sition to superannuation choice for businesses and No. 3) BILL 2005 employees, and minimise the burden on employ- ers in complying with their choice obligations. This bill amends various taxation laws to imple- ment a range of changes and improvements to The Superannuation Holding Account Special Australia’s taxation system. Account was originally established to receive small superannuation amounts from employers

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 91

Firstly, the bill will implement a number of pro- penses and zone tax offsets, as well as the Medi- posals to increase flexibility for charitable funds, care levy and Medicare levy surcharge. It will ancillary funds and prescribed private funds, and provide consistency for taxpayers and will allow hence further encourage charitable giving in Aus- more taxpayers to access the dependant-related tralia. The bill expands the concessions relating to offsets, the concessional Medicare levy and the capital gains tax provisions, distributions by Medicare levy surcharge thresholds offsets and charitable funds, the income tax exemption for the Medicare levy and Medicare levy surcharge charities and the refund of franking credits provi- family thresholds. sions. The measure gives effect to the Govern- Full details of the measures in this bill are con- ment’s announcement in the 2004-05 Budget. tained in the explanatory memorandum. I com- The amendment in Schedule 2 to this bill is tech- mend this bill. nical in nature and deals with of the recently ex- Debate (on motion by Senator Abetz) ad- panded foreign branch profits exemption. The journed. expanded exemption, in conjunction with Austra- lia’s treaties, could have resulted in foreign Ordered that the following bills be listed branch income and gains derived from the opera- on the Notice Paper as separate packages: tion of ships or aircraft in international traffic not Asbestos-related Claims (Management of being taxed in Australia or the country in which Commonwealth Liabilities) (Consequential the company operates. Schedule 2 to this bill re- and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2005 instates the way Australian companies with for- Asbestos-related Claims (Management of eign branch income and gains from the operation Commonwealth Liabilities) Bill 2005 of ships or aircraft in international traffic were taxed prior to the implementation of the expanded ————— foreign branch income exemption. This will en- Import Processing Charges Amendment Bill sure that such amounts continue to be taxed in 2005 Australia. Customs Legislation Amendment (Import The Commissioner of Taxation can release tax- Processing Charges) Bill 2005 payer information to certain law enforcement ————— agencies such as police forces and various Crime Commissions, if the Commissioner is satisfied Superannuation Bill 2005 that the information is relevant to establishing Superannuation (Consequential Amend- whether a serious offence has been committed or ments) Bill 2005 to the making of a proceeds of crime order. The Ordered that the following bills be listed third measure will add the Corruption and Crime on the Notice Paper as separate orders of the Commission of Western Australia to the list of day: law enforcement agencies to which taxpayer in- formation can be provided. Superannuation Laws Amendment (Aboli- tion of Surcharge) Bill 2005 The fourth measure will amend the Fringe Bene- fits Tax Assessment Act 1986 to make a technical Tax Laws Amendment (Medicare Levy and correction, to clarify that certain government in- Medicare Levy Surcharge) Bill 2005 stitutions that are charitable institutions at law are Aged Care Amendment (Extra Service) Bill not eligible fringe benefits tax rebatable employer 2005 status from 1 July 2005. This amendment will Civil Aviation Amendment Bill 2005 ensure that the status quo is not changed. Crimes Amendment Bill 2005 Finally, this bill introduces a standard definition of a dependant: a child less than 21 years or a Health Legislation Amendment (Australian full-time student less than 25 years. This means Community Pharmacy Authority) Bill 2005 there will be a single set of age criteria for the Higher Education Legislation Amendment housekeeper, child housekeeper, medical ex- (2005 Measures No. 2) Bill 2005

CHAMBER 92 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Indigenous Education (Targeted Assistance) NATIONAL SECURITY Amendment Bill 2005 INFORMATION (CRIMINAL Maritime Transport Security Amendment PROCEEDINGS) AMENDMENT Bill 2005 (APPLICATION) BILL 2005 Payment Systems (Regulation) Amendment NAVIGATION AMENDMENT BILL 2005 Bill 2005 FAMILY AND COMMUNITY Primary Industries (Excise) Levies Amend- SERVICES AND VETERANS’ AFFAIRS ment (Rice) Bill 2005 LEGISLATION AMENDMENT Sex Discrimination Amendment (Teaching (FURTHER 2004 ELECTION Profession) Bill 2004 COMMITMENTS AND OTHER Superannuation Legislation Amendment MEASURES) BILL 2005 (Choice of Superannuation Funds) Bill 2005 FARM HOUSEHOLD SUPPORT Tax Laws Amendment (2005 Measures No. AMENDMENT BILL 2005 3) Bill 2005 COMMITTEES NATIONAL HEALTH AMENDMENT (PROSTHESES) BILL 2005 Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee: Joint ABORIGINAL AND TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER COMMISSION Membership AMENDMENT BILL 2005 Message received from the House of Rep- APPROPRIATION (TSUNAMI resentatives notifying the Senate of the ap- FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE) BILL pointment of Mr C. P. Thompson to the Joint 2004-2005 Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, De- fence and Trade in place of Mr Baldwin. APPROPRIATION (TSUNAMI FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE AND BANKRUPTCY AND FAMILY LAW AUSTRALIA-INDONESIA LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL PARTNERSHIP) BILL 2004-2005 2005 APPROPRIATION BILL (NO. 3) 2004- NEW INTERNATIONAL TAX 2005 ARRANGEMENTS (MANAGED FUNDS AND OTHER MEASURES) BILL 2005 APPROPRIATION BILL (NO. 4) 2004-2005 AGED CARE AMENDMENT (TRANSITION CARE AND ASSETS APPROPRIATION (PARLIAMENTARY TESTING) BILL 2005 DEPARTMENTS) BILL (NO. 2) 2004-2005 TAX LAWS AMENDMENT (2004 MEASURES NO. 6) BILL 2005 ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL AMENDMENT BILL 2005 TELECOMMUNICATIONS (CONSUMER PROTECTION AND PARLIAMENTARY SERVICE SERVICE STANDARDS) AMENDMENT AMENDMENT BILL 2005 (NATIONAL RELAY SERVICE) BILL AUSTRALIAN SPORTS COMMISSION 2005 AMENDMENT BILL 2004 [2005] MEDICAL INDEMNITY LEGISLATION TAX LAWS AMENDMENT (2004 AMENDMENT BILL 2005 MEASURES NO. 7) BILL 2005 DEFENCE AMENDMENT BILL 2005

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 93

AGRICULTURAL AND VETERINARY HIGHER EDUCATION LEGISLATION CHEMICALS LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (2005 MEASURES No. 1) AMENDMENT (LEVY AND FEES) BILL BILL 2005 2005 Assent BROADCASTING SERVICES Messages from His Excellency the Gov- AMENDMENT (ANTI-SIPHONING) ernor-General were reported informing the BILL 2005 Senate that he had assented to the bills. AUSTRALIAN COMMUNICATIONS SOUTHERN BLUEFIN TUNA AND MEDIA AUTHORITY BILL 2005 FISHERIES MANAGEMENT PLAN AUSTRALIAN COMMUNICATIONS Senator GREIG (Western Australia) AND MEDIA AUTHORITY (4.27 pm)—I move: (CONSEQUENTIAL AND That the proposed accreditation of the South- TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS) BILL ern Bluefin Tuna Fisheries Management Plan (as 2005 amended), dated 10 November 2004 and made TELECOMMUNICATIONS (CARRIER under subsection 33(3) of the Environment Pro- LICENCE CHARGES) AMENDMENT tection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, BILL 2005 be opposed. TELECOMMUNICATIONS Australia’s fisheries industry makes a sig- (NUMBERING CHARGES) nificant contribution to the wealth of the na- AMENDMENT BILL 2005 tion, and the Commonwealth government plays a pivotal role in the regulation and TELEVISION LICENCE FEES management of the industries surrounding AMENDMENT BILL 2005 the exploitation of our marine resources. DATACASTING CHARGE While the Australian Democrats are very (IMPOSITION) AMENDMENT BILL supportive of the fisheries industry, we are 2005 concerned that Commonwealth-managed RADIOCOMMUNICATIONS fisheries are not being managed on a sustain- (RECEIVER LICENCE TAX) able basis. Fisheries managers seek to maxi- AMENDMENT BILL 2005 mise the sustainable yield of our fisheries; RADIOCOMMUNICATIONS however, they do so on the basis of incom- (SPECTRUM LICENCE TAX) plete information and without adequate re- AMENDMENT BILL 2005 gard for the precautionary principle. RADIOCOMMUNICATIONS At least a dozen species targeted in Com- (TRANSMITTER LICENCE TAX) monwealth-managed fisheries are known to AMENDMENT BILL 2005 be overfished, and in many more the status of the fish stocks remains unknown. The RADIO LICENCE FEES AMENDMENT state of the stock of southern bluefin tuna, BILL 2005 however, remains in little doubt. Southern AUSTRALIAN INSTITUTE OF bluefin tuna, SBT, is a species highly prized MARINE SCIENCE AMENDMENT on international markets. Australia, as one of BILL 2005 the major fishing nations for this species, has SOCIAL SECURITY LEGISLATION participated for a number of years at an in- AMENDMENT (ONE-OFF PAYMENTS ternational level in failed efforts to form the FOR CARERS) BILL 2005

CHAMBER 94 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 groundwork for sustainable fishing through- tween 37 and 58 per cent of that in 1986— out the species’ range. equivalent to a 50 per cent decline in a single Time and time again research has indi- generation. cated that the parental biomass of SBT con- Further, projections over the years 1992 to tinues to decline and is currently at histori- 1997 consistently overestimated the parental cally low levels. It has declined by up to 93 biomass in the following two years by up to per cent since 1960, when substantial fishing 60 per cent. Whilst virtual population analy- had already occurred. Southern bluefin tuna ses by both Australia and Japan have indi- has undergone a population reduction of at cated continuous parental biomass decline least 80 per cent over three generations ac- between 1980 and 1993, all assessments cording to the International Union for the since 1984 have predicted that reversal of Conservation of Nature and Natural Re- parental biomass decline would occur two to sources. The government’s Bureau of Rural three years after the year of assessment. Sciences has put present SBT parental bio- Population estimates and projections by Aus- mass in the order of seven to 15 per cent of tralian and New Zealand scientists indicate that which existed in 1960, a time when sub- continued population decline. To date, these stantial reductions had already occurred, and estimates are considered to be overoptimis- in the order of 25 to 53 per cent of the 1980 tic, as predicted trends have failed to match level. These are drastic and biologically un- the actual persistent decline in spawning fish. sustainable declines that show no signs of There has been no evidence of a reversal of reversal. the species’ decline to date. SBT has been fished extensively, primar- It became evident in the early 1980s that ily by Australia, Japan and New Zealand. the parental stock had been dangerously The SBT fishery began in earnest in the overfished. As a consequence, Japan, Austra- 1950s, with Japan exploiting stock on the lia and New Zealand introduced a voluntary high seas and Australia fishing the species limit to their total catch through annual tri- within its own coastal waters. The Japanese lateral agreements within the Commission fishery expanded rapidly, culminating in a for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin peak long-line catch for Japan in the early Tuna and eventually introduced quotas. In 1960s of some 81,605 tonnes. In contrast to the 1980s, SBT numbers had undergone such that, today the total global allowable catch a reduction that less than 75 per cent of the for SBT remains at around 15,000 tonnes— agreed quota was caught. and yet stocks still show no sign of recovery. Within Australia’s fisheries, SBT has been The 1996 report of the Scientific Committee identified by the federal government’s own of the Commission for the Conservation of agencies as the species most under threat, Southern Bluefin Tuna, CCSBT, estimated with its status listed as ‘overfished’ for many that the parental biomass in 1995 was five to years now. A large decline in catch per unit eight per cent of the 1960 parental biomass, of effort is evident over the past 30 years, which had already declined due to significant with a decrease by 1992 of 56 per cent of the catches by Japanese fleets in the 1950s. In 1980 catch per unit of effort, or CPUE, lev- fact, 1961, 1960 and 1959 were the peak els. Nominal CPUE of the parental fish is three years for total global SBT catch in the now 26 per cent of the 1980 level and just history of the fishery. The 2003 spawning two per cent of the 1960 level. SBT parental stock biomass was estimated to be between biomass remains at historically low levels 25 and 47 per cent of that in 1980 and be-

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 95 and present parental stock levels are signifi- species for export without tying his accredi- cantly below the biologically safe level. As tation to quotas set out under CCSBT was an indicator of the status of the SBT fishery, irresponsible and leaves Australia’s fisheries the CPUE figures correspond with findings management regime open to criticism. It may that excessive fishing has reduced signifi- also have locked in further declines in SBT cantly the number of spawning SBT. Under fish stock, already internationally recognised current global catch rates, the SBT spawning as critically endangered. stock will not recover by 2020, and therefore Since 1997 Japan, Australia and New Zea- there is a distinct probability that it will not land have been unable to agree on catch lim- increase at all. In this context, the decision its for this species; however, the fishery is no by the Minister for the Environment and longer dominated by these three players. Ko- Heritage, Senator Campbell, to accredit the rea, with a voluntary quota of 1,140 tonnes, fishery as sustainable is even more incom- has recently joined CCSBT; and Taiwan, also prehensible. with a voluntary quota of 1,140 tonnes, has The biological characteristics of the SBT joined the extended commission. The make the species slow to recover from over- CCSBT has agreed to a total world catch of fishing and vulnerable to particular fishing 14,030 tonnes: Japan, 6,065 tonnes; Austra- methods. SBT is a highly migratory pelagic lia, 5,265 tonnes; Korea, 1,140 tonnes; Tai- fish that is long-lived—up to 40 years—slow wan, 1,140 tonnes; New Zealand, 420 ton- growing and late to mature, with maturation nes; and 900 tonnes for non-members Indo- at 10 to12 years or older. Very few fish less nesia, the Philippines and South Africa. than 10 years old are caught in spawning CCSBT has acknowledged the advice of its grounds. Mature SBT have a tendency to scientific committee that, at a global catch of aggregate on the spawning grounds, which about 15,000 tonnes, there is an equal prob- makes them vulnerable to long-lining and ability that the critically endangered stock purse seining, and localised overfishing can could decline or improve. easily occur. Further, pelagic fish such as In 1999 Indonesia, whose waters share the SBT aggregate when numbers decline, wors- sole breeding grounds, took 2,483 tonnes. In ening pre-existing threats and making them 2002 CCSBT expressed concerns regarding easy targets for well-resourced fishing fleets. the level of catch outside the commission Despite our current voluntary international and recent significant increases of catch by catch quota of 5,265 tonnes, Australia ex- some non-members. In addition to the cur- ported more than 9,000 tonnes, predomi- rent CCSBT quota, of which Australia takes nantly to Japan, in the 2003-04 season. In- almost half, catches by non-parties to the dustry figures claim that ranching operations CCSBT have grown rapidly in the past dec- which are fattening fish in Port Lincoln can ade, exceeding 7,500 tonnes by the year account for the extra 4,000 tonnes of SBT 2000. CCSBT also acknowledged that ‘there exported from Australia during the season. is little chance that the SBT spawning stock However, the Democrats remain concerned would be rebuilt to the 1980 levels by 2020’, that a lack of comprehensive observer cover- as had been set as an interim goal and identi- age of the SBT fleet, the high value of indi- fied as the biologically safe level for con- vidual fish, and the many loopholes in the tinuation of species viability. How the minis- weighing and accounting system for SBT are ter found evidence that this fishery is based grounds enough for tighter policing of our on a sustainable management regime which export quota. For the minister to approve the will ensure the future of both this highly lu-

CHAMBER 96 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 crative species and the industry that relies on Ongoing commercial targeting of this spe- it is difficult to understand. cies and the inability of those with commer- Under current management regimes, there cial interests to achieve recovery objectives has been no evidence of recovery. CCSBT suggest a significant level of failure to ad- has shown itself unable to achieve its stated dress problems inherent in species conserva- recovery objectives for this species. Ongoing tion, and yet Senator Ian Campbell, in one of negotiations over quota allocations and total his first acts as environment minister, signed allowable catch continue, predicted parental off on commercial targeting of SBT as an stock increases have failed a number of times environmentally sustainable industry and, to be realised, and aims to bring the popula- despite its depleted status and the risk of its tion back to the 1980 level, regarded as ‘bio- extinction, accredited export of this species. logically safe’, have not in any way been With existing examples of abundant fish spe- met. The Australian government’s Endan- cies, such as Atlantic cod, crumbling under gered Species Scientific Subcommittee in the ongoing weight of commercial pressures, 1999 noted a breakdown in negotiations in and southern bluefin tuna already listed as the CCSBT forum in 1999 and expressed the critically endangered by the International concern that ‘if current management actions Union for the Conservation of Nature, we to address the past decline of the species are Democrats believe there is an urgent need for not successful, and populations decline fur- much stronger action on behalf of the gov- ther, the species might become threatened’. It ernment to rein in Australia’s SBT quota, is our view that regional management re- which has not changed since 1984 despite gimes working towards the conservation of ongoing declines. SBT have floundered, resulting in real and This is a highly valuable species that not imminent threats to this species’ ecological only is fished through the targeted catch of viability. Yet Australia remains one of the the Commonwealth southern bluefin tuna predominant fishers of the species. fishery, currently with 99 statutory fishing The species is now listed under both Vic- right holders and just a dozen major opera- torian and New South Wales state laws as a tors, but also is regarded as by-product threatened species, and conservationists con- within other Commonwealth and state fisher- tinue to push for a listing under federal envi- ies. International pressures on fish stocks are ronment laws. The science underpinning the only increasing, and globally pelagic fish population statistics suggests such a listing stocks are considered to be at great risk from would be well within the legislative require- overexploitation. Of those, southern bluefin ments for threatened species recognition. I tuna appears to be the most valuable and at also understand that some environment greatest risk. groups have launched legal action in the We Democrats call on all senators to sup- Administrative Appeals Tribunal objecting to port our disallowance of the government’s the accreditation of this fishery as ecologi- environmental accreditation for this fishery cally sustainable. There can be little doubt on the grounds that it is in no way ecologi- that while the southern bluefin tuna fishery cally sustainable. All the evidence points to continues to exploit an already heavily de- ongoing and serious declines in the breeding pleted target species Australia’s reputation as stocks of this fishery and to increasing fish- a world leader in fisheries management will ing pressures on remaining stocks from our be undermined. regional neighbours. Australia remains one of the largest exploiters of the southern blue-

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 97 fin fishery and is largely responsible for its Wales Social Policy Research Centre has ongoing declines. We cannot stand idly by estimated that it would cost as little as two while our environment minister and our fish- per cent of gross national income to eradicate eries minister, Senator Ian Macdonald, bury poverty in Australia. He concludes that it is their heads in the sand and blame other na- not a matter of affordability, it is a matter of tions for the ongoing declines. As one of the choice. The coalition government has chosen longstanding fishers of this species, we Aus- yet again in this budget to make life easier tralians have an obligation and an inherent for the wealthy and more difficult for the responsibility to manage the stocks in a sus- poor. The government’s welfare to work pol- tainable way. Accrediting export with no icy without a doubt will push more people change in quota will in no way progress the into poverty. So much for the family friendly sustainable use of this fish. government. We see the budget and the huge Question negatived. tax cuts for the well off as being, as the Greens have indicated before, antifamily. TAX LAWS AMENDMENT (PERSONAL INCOME TAX REDUCTION) BILL 2005 The National Council of Single Mothers and their Children has advised me of a num- Second Reading ber of examples of sole parents in different Debate resumed. circumstances who will be disadvantaged Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) under the government’s welfare to work pol- (4.42 pm)—Just before question time I was icy. They tell me of the case of a single speaking about the issue of poverty, which mother who has a nine-year-old child with NATSEM, the National Centre for Social and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and Economic Modelling, estimates affects al- who gets no assistance from the child’s fa- most two million Australians. I was speaking ther. She is needed to volunteer at her local about a report that was released last month school because this public school is short of by the St Vincent de Paul Society into in- resources. There is no after school care come equality, which speaks about the grow- available, although she does have her child ing gap between the rich and the poor in on a waiting list. She currently does 10 hours Australia and the fact that the income of the of paid work. The question to the govern- bottom 10 per cent of income earners has ment is: will this be deemed enough, or will risen by just $26 per week whereas the in- she be forced to seek more paid work and come for the top 10 per cent of income earn- therefore have to reduce the care that she ers has risen by $762 a week. The report offers to her child and the voluntary work notes that inequality of income is an open that she does at her child’s local school? door to inequality in access to health ser- What impact will occur on such schools if vices, housing services, public education, single parents cannot continue to do the vol- transport, communications, child care, aged untary work that many of them are now car- care services and other sorts of social ameni- rying out? ties, such as going to the cinema or going to Another question that the National Coun- a sporting event. cil for Single Mothers and their Children This inequality could easily be addressed have asked is, most importantly: what will by investing in social services and by invest- happen when children are sick? They ask: ing in better income support and secure em- how will the government legislate to protect ployment with fair pay. Professor Peter mothers from being forced to attend to em- Saunders of the University of New South ployment requirements rather than care for

CHAMBER 98 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 their sick child? What Job Network provider The government continues yet again in or employer is going to be willing to ac- this budget to give priority to the private commodate the needs of their sick child? For health insurance rebate, which means that example, if you have something like chick- next financial year $2.88 billion of public enpox running through a family over many money out of our health budget will be spent weeks, what is going to happen to the to provide benefits—that is, private health mother’s income over that period? Mothers insurance—mostly for the well off, rather will be in an untenable situation of having to than investing that money in our essential decide whether to leave their children unat- public health services, which desperately tended or risk their income support. What need it. The government, for example, chose happens when child welfare agencies are in this federal budget to commit just called and a mother is considered neglectful $170 million to Indigenous health care when because she made the choice to leave her we all know from listening to organisations sick children unattended so that she did not like the AMA that this is a fraction of what is risk her income support? needed to redress the extreme disadvantage Single parents will also be disadvantaged that Indigenous Australians suffer and to ad- by the government’s Welfare to Work meas- dress the great disparity whereby Indigenous ure because of the low rate of income sup- Australians die 20 years younger than non- port that they will receive compared to the Indigenous Australians. The government has rate that they currently get and the higher also decided to lift the Medicare safety net effective marginal tax rates that they will threshold and is now promising to look at pay. In this bill the government has chosen to allowing private health insurance funds to reduce the top marginal tax rate for the move into the area of covering non-hospital wealthy whilst failing to reduce sufficiently health services, a proposal that it had previ- the effective marginal tax rate for the lowest ously rejected in 2003. income earners. The effective marginal tax The government is also reducing invest- rate is 40 per cent for some welfare benefici- ment in public housing whilst encouraging aries, but it will be 60 per cent for single par- private investment in the high-priced resi- ents, low-income parents and people with a dential property market through its taxation disability, who are forced to look for paid policy. It is introducing an inflationary and work under the government’s new policy. regressive tax rebate for child-care fees when This favouring of the wealthy over the most it should have and could have put this money needy comes at the same time that the gov- into the more progressive child-care benefit ernment are privatising many of our essential or provided more of the child-care places services. They are making decisions such as that are desperately needed by mothers. lifting the cost of tertiary education for stu- All through this budget the government dents and introducing more government are introducing changes to tax cuts, with funded private technical colleges. Both the Welfare to Work amongst these changes. government and the opposition voted to in- They are also in this term of government crease the cost to patients of essential medi- seeking to attack the wages and conditions of cines in the lead-up to this budget, and in this ordinary working Australians and their fami- budget we see this government also lifting lies, requiring the lowest paid workers in the the threshold for the Pharmaceutical Benefits community to bear responsibility for any Scheme safety net, meaning people will have unemployment that may occur through the to spend more before they get any support. new minimum wage fixing procedure. I

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 99 spoke earlier about this government perceiv- lia’s future in the areas of health, edu- ing the current minimum wage rate as too cation and the environment; and high already, even though it is half what the (b) this resolution be communicated by Treasurer acknowledges Australian families message to the House of Representa- are struggling to survive on. The government tives”. are seeking to promote insecure work Senator ALLISON (Victoria—Leader of through individual contracts and giving em- the Australian Democrats) (4.51 pm)—I rise ployers the right to sack employees at whim. to speak too on the Tax Laws Amendment The Labor Party was right to condemn the (Personal Income Tax Reduction) Bill 2005 budget tax cuts as unfair, but we believe it is before us today. I want to start by noting that on the wrong track with its call for redistri- this is the second tax package which has de- bution. Doubling the tax cut for low- and livered substantial tax cuts to people on high middle-income earners from $6 to $12 a incomes. What the Democrats most want to week is still wasteful when it is compared to point out in this whole debate is that there the many other useful purposes to which the are people on very low incomes who will funds could be put, such as investing in pub- receive almost nothing out of this package. lic services—health, education, the environ- The average earner will save around $1.54 ment and the like, things I spoke about ear- per week if they are on $10,000. If they are lier. lucky enough to be on $120,000 then the amount that is saved is $60.62 a week. So we Labor leader Kim Beazley, answering a say that this is unfair. This package is unfair. question from Laurie Oakes on the Sunday Not so long ago we dealt with a previous tax program on 15 May, said that Labor had rec- package which delivered tax savings to peo- ognised a political imperative to reduce the ple on more than $52,000 a year—$21.7 bil- tax paid by those who aspire to more—the lion over four years to give high-income so-called aspirational voters. This political earners the greatest benefits of this package. imperative that Mr Beazley was speaking about is eating away at our sense of fairness The Democrats support a taxation system and decency. It is distorting our sense of pro- that is broadly based. We support the princi- portion as to who is really most in need. ple of indexing taxes in general with income Around 4.5 million Australians live in tax brackets and regularly adjusting what is households that struggle on $400 a week. known as bracket creep. We believe that in- Full-time adult ordinary time earnings are come tax brackets should be linked to mean- $993.10 a week, or $51,641 a year, and we ingful social indicators and we think that the know that plenty of people cannot find tax-free threshold should be raised to at least enough paid work to make up a full working the poverty line. At the present time we tax week. I move the second reading amendment people who earn a mere $6,000 a year. Even circulated in my name and Senator Brown’s if we were just to index that $6,000—which on behalf of the Australian Greens: was established, as I understand it, in 2001— Omit all words after “That”, substitute: the threshold would at least be $1,000 higher at the current time. The fact that this package “(a) the Senate is of the opinion that it effectively indexes rates at the higher levels should not consider the bill further and that the revenue otherwise forgone but leaves the threshold in place we think is from the tax cuts contained in the bill highly problematic. should be instead invested in Austra- In our view the first budget priority should have been the underspend in areas such as

CHAMBER 100 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 health and education, the environment and income earners before going beyond that. infrastructure. It is essential, though, that we High-income earners will receive a tax cut of see some tax relief for low-income earners, $4,502 a year whilst the average income because these are the people who pay very earner will receive $312 a year. When you high effective marginal tax rates—and that is add to that $4,502 the $1,500 that high- why the Democrats will be moving some income earners will receive from the scrap- amendments on that. We want to see their ping of the superannuation surcharge, that is disposable income increase and their living a very substantial tax cut indeed. standards improve as a result and to see this We have announced today that we will package used as a way in which we can en- support the ALP’s amendments to this bill. I courage the transition from welfare to work hope they will seriously consider ours, but through these incentives. At the present time we have indicated that we will support theirs. there are in fact disincentives in place for They are a fall-back mechanism only and we people to get into the work force. do not think they go far enough. They are not We would also support the bracket creep as fair as our proposed package but, nonethe- adjustments for higher income earners but less, we will be supporting the ALP on those we say that they need to be funded through amendments and we certainly hope the ALP cracking down on unnecessary tax conces- stick to them. One of the problems in recent sions and loopholes. The fact that the gov- times is that the ALP have very much had a ernment used the tax cuts as an election- patch-up approach to tax cuts, and it is not winning device perverts the real policy need altogether clear what the ALP stand for. I for structural income tax reform and is in want to reiterate today that our highest prior- effect just some sort of periodic relief. ity is people on low incomes. People on low On the tax-free threshold in this package, incomes are our first priority, and we have a we will move amendments to increase it to plan, as I said earlier, to raise the threshold to $10,000. We think that $12,500 makes sense $10,000, then $12,500 and then $20,000. because that is the Henderson poverty line— That is what is known as a long-reaching or the minimum subsistence line, as it is plan but, at the present time, we do not know known—and then we should be looking what Labor propose. Nonetheless, we will, as longer term at increasing that threshold to I have said, support their amendments. $20,000. By doing that everyone gets a tax It is worth bearing in mind that there are cut, but it is much fairer on those people at 1.8 million Australians who earn less than low-income levels. We say the tax cut priori- $10,000 a year. I think that is an alarming ties the government has in this bill are all statistic. Most of them, it is true, do not cur- wrong. There is the need for tax relief for rently pay tax. If our policy were supported low-income earners and so, as I said, we will around 400,000 more taxpayers would no be moving to lift that tax-free threshold to longer be paying income tax. If our amend- $10,000, delivering $680 a year to benefit all ments to raise the threshold do not get sup- taxpayers. ported in this chamber—and I think it is fair We think there is an argument for ration- to say the ALP has suggested it will not sup- alisation of the tax system. At the present port them—we will move to split the tax time we are predicting a $9 billion annual bills. We will attempt to support the cuts for surplus. So we are not opposed to tax cuts those people earning up to $21,600—that is, per se, but our approach is to start with low- the cut from 17c in the dollar to 15c in the dollar—and we will oppose those income tax

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 101 cuts for people on higher incomes. The other However, we will stand very much on point I want to make today is about the tax principle on the question of the bills and we schedules. will vote against them if the amendments are Senator Boswell—What about the regula- not won. We certainly hope that the Labor tions? Are you going to support— Party stand firm on their amendments and do not give in when they are bounced back from Senator ALLISON—If Senator Boswell the House of Representatives. This was a is interested in this issue he might listen, and great opportunity for tax reform in this coun- then I will— try. I think the government has messed up. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT These are the wrong tax cuts for us to con- (Senator Bolkus)—Order! Senator Boswell! sider, and it is a great pity that an opportunity I announced this morning that the Democ- to take people out of poverty has not been rats, along with most others I have heard taken up in this legislation. speak on this subject, will not be supporting FIRST SPEECH a disallowance should it be moved. It is a The PRESIDENT—Before I call Senator very hypothetical question. Nobody so far, as Fierravanti-Wells, I remind honourable sena- far I know, has said that they will disallow tors that this is her first speech. I therefore the schedules. We do not think it makes a lot ask that the usual courtesies be extended to of sense at the end of the day. After 1 July her. the government will be able to introduce whatever schedule it likes, and effectively An incident having occurred in the gal- others in this chamber will not have much lery— say over that. It is an administrative vehi- The PRESIDENT—Order! I remind cle—it is the schedule which lets employers those people in the gallery that clapping is know what they should take out of wages in disorderly. tax. We see no purpose in artificially stop- Senator FIERRAVANTI-WELLS (New ping that schedule for a matter of a few South Wales) (5.02 pm)—Thank you Mr weeks. President. It is with great pride and honour Mr Costello asked us late last week to that I rise this evening to make my maiden give an undertaking. I said I would take that speech. My presence here today follows the to my colleagues. I have now done that, and I retirement of Senator John Tierney on 14 have advised the Treasurer that this is our April. On behalf of the people of New South position. The schedules are simply mathe- Wales I pay tribute to him for his service to matical calculations of an administrative na- the Liberal Party and the Senate. I wish John ture. That does not mean that we are voting and Pam all the very best for the future. I for the government’s tax package—we are would like to thank the Clerk of the Senate certainly not; we are going to protest right to and his staff and other senators for their kind the end—but we do not see the point in un- assistance and guidance in acquainting me necessarily delaying the situation and costing with this place and its procedures. I espe- business, with the confusion that might arise cially thank Andrea Griffiths-Ianson, Black should those schedules have to be relied Rod, for her friendship and guidance over upon for the first couple of months. As I said, many years. I was proud to be welcomed by the government can in any case introduce her to this place on 9 May. schedules at any time it chooses, so it seems My family’s journey began on 14 Febru- to us to be a pointless exercise. ary 1953, when a young man of 24 years of

CHAMBER 102 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 age arrived alone on the docks at Sydney. He parents arrived there were no such services. had travelled from Italy. He had left every- Self-sufficiency and employment became the thing he knew and loved, including his fi- cornerstones on the road to building a better ancee. He spoke no English. His old suitcase life for yourself and for your children. Fam- carried the dreams and aspirations that had ily and family life have always been very motivated his migration to so far away a important to me. I believe in the traditional land. That man was my dad. He first lived in family as the bedrock institution of our soci- single quarters near the old steelworks at ety. I will support policies which strengthen Port Kembla. Later he travelled to North and enhance the value and importance of the Queensland to cut sugar cane. He saved family. enough money for a deposit on a home. He My education in the Catholic school sys- returned to Port Kembla and bought a small tem began with kindergarten at St Francis of cottage. My mother joined him in 1959. Assisi, overlooking the steelworks. Seventy- They had been engaged for 13 years. They five kids started school with me. Only a few married. I was born a year later and my spoke English, and I was not one of them. brother five years later. Pops, could you ever My primary schooling at St Patrick’s was have imagined when you arrived that one under the shadow of the chimney stack at day you would be sitting here watching your Port Kembla. I completed my secondary daughter in the Australian Senate? education at St Mary’s College in Wollon- Mr President, with hard work, determina- gong. From these early days I have followed tion, dedication and the will to succeed you the Christian faith. I believe in the values and can do anything, you can be anyone and you virtues that it teaches. They have guided me can go anywhere. My parents and millions of and will continue to do so in the years ahead. other migrants who came here were guided During this period I also learnt the impor- by this ideal. This is what makes Australia tance of choice. When my father worked at such a wonderful place. Today I could be the the steelworks, the union movement was daughter of any migrant to Australia. The very strong. I remember vividly when the philosophy of individual effort for just re- unions would call a strike. My father was the ward is embodied in the stories of millions sole breadwinner, so working every day was just like my parents who have helped shape very important to him. When the unions the destiny of this great nation. It is also the called a strike, I saw the inner turmoil in my philosophy behind the great party I am privi- father. He needed to go to work but, like leged to represent. Today I would like to many other workers, could not afford to share with you the values and beliefs that break ranks. Regardless of the merits of the have helped shape my life and which will issue, they could not go against the power of underpin my service to the people of New the unions. They did what they were told. I South Wales as their senator. respect the right of the individual to choose I grew up in Port Kembla, the industrial to be part of a collective bargaining regime heart of the Illawarra. My father worked at but there should be no compulsion. I say to the steelworks. My mother stayed at home. I the elements of the union movement that are am grateful for the many sacrifices that my gearing up for a fight against the Howard parents made to ensure that our family had government on industrial relations: use ar- the best that hard work could give. Today, gument and reason, not threats and compul- many who come to this country are assisted sion—remember who you are representing. by generous settlement services. When my Mr President, I will be supporting changes to

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 103 industrial relations laws that encourage spirit of Anzac and what it means to the soul flexibility, fairness and freedom; a system of Australia. that increases job growth, productivity and My work in politics started as a policy ad- innovation—that will give Australians true viser with the Hon. Jim Carlton. Jim’s guid- choice. ance and support over many years has pre- After completing my secondary schooling, pared me well for my new role and I thank I attended the Australian National University him very much. I then became senior private in Canberra where I studied political science, secretary to the Hon. John Fahey, then Pre- languages and law. In 1984, I commenced mier of New South Wales. It was a great my 20-year career as a lawyer with the Aus- privilege and a fantastic opportunity to work tralian Government Solicitor and I pay trib- for him in the engine room of a coalition ute to my former colleagues, some of whom government. I would also like to thank Alan are here today. Having had the opportunity to McArthur, who gave me my start in law and represent many government departments and most recently employed me as a consultant statutory authorities over the years, I bring to with Minter Ellison Lawyers in Sydney. this place a broad and practical knowledge of Community service has been an important the workings of government. Having de- feature of my life since I was young. As the fended both good and bad decisions of gov- daughter of migrants I was frequently called ernment, I have taken a keen interest in good upon to help my parents and others in the public administration. Acting for the Austra- community, translating and assisting people lian Taxation Office, I wound up companies with simple tasks to help them in their daily that did not pay their tax. I retain a particular lives. Over the years, I have been privileged concern about corporate responsibility and to work for many different groups and asso- corporate morality, especially in dealings ciations as a volunteer. I am honoured that with workers entitlements. many of the people I worked with are here I also have an interest in simplifying the today to share this special day with me. tax system. When I first started practising I am a proud member of the Australian- law, the tax legislation was in one volume; it Italian community and have been honoured is now in four. An even, balanced or alterna- to serve them as a national and international tively flat tax regime could be an option in representative. I would like to acknowledge simplifying the system. The Howard gov- the presence today of representatives from ernment has made significant reforms in this Italian government bodies: the embassy, the area for the benefit of the average taxpayer consulate, the Italian Institute of Culture and and small business. More can and should be the trade commission. I would especially like done. to acknowledge my dear friends Nick and During my career, I particularly valued the Silvana Papallo and Irvin and Lottie Vidor. work I did for the Department of Defence. Thank you for your total faith in me. It is a This coupled with my husband’s service in source of great pride to come to this place as the Royal Australian Navy has fostered a the first Australian woman of Italian origin. I keen interest in defence matters, which I believe I am also the first Australian of Ital- would like to pursue in this place. I would ian origin to the Senate from New South like to thank our many friends from the Wales. I will continue to strengthen relation- armed services who are here today. I espe- ships with Italy in particular and more cially value the importance of tradition and broadly with Europe. service to one’s country. I believe in the

CHAMBER 104 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Over the years, I have also supported a and government can unite and together gen- number of important causes. I support our erate true social capital. current constitutional arrangements. Through Australia today is a country forged from my work with Australians for a Constitu- different cultures and tied by a set of com- tional Monarchy, I have worked for its reten- mon beliefs and values—a belief in a free tion. I also uphold our flag as an unchanging and competitive market system; in freedom and timeless symbol of the values and virtues of choice; of respect for human life; of the that unify our society. Over the years, I have rule of law and a fair go for all. The promo- been involved in many charitable activities, tion of these values and beliefs across the but none has impacted more on me than my diversity of our contemporary Australian work with Father Chris Riley’s Youth off the society is vital to our continued social cohe- Streets. I am honoured that Father Chris is sion. here today, together with some board mem- I have lived my life across the diversity bers and staff. Father, you taught me that that is Australia. Whilst cultural diversity has there is no such thing as a bad child, just bad brought us many advantages, there are also circumstances. I have come to understand the challenges. When my parents first came to resilience of our youth against terrible adver- this country, they, like many others, experi- sity. A child is abused every 13 minutes enced prejudice. It was a fact of life. They across Australia. Perpetrators of crimes got on with it. They assimilated, they shared against children and those who protect them their culture, traditions, values and beliefs— deserve the severest of punishment. We must they accepted and became accepted. Through confront and end child abuse and the exploi- this, they and many others helped forge the tation of youth once and for all. My work unique Australian way of life we have today. with Youth off the Streets has also reaffirmed my view of the importance of family support While some seek to gloss over divisions in to young people, of zero tolerance on drugs our society by affirming a desire for harmo- and my opposition to heroin injecting rooms nious coexistence and religious tolerance, and lowering the age of consent. In contrast, divisions do exist. We need to address them programs such as Tough on Drugs and Val- before the rifts become so deep that our soci- ues in Schools have been very successful. As ety’s very existence is threatened. Australia a senator, I will be advocating their contin- is a tolerant and compassionate society ued support and expansion. founded on understanding and respecting social and religious differences. Our success Throughout my community service, I have as a culturally diverse society comes from come to value highly the contribution of vol- putting our commitment to Australia first. unteers in Australia, whether this be in the family, amongst the sick, the disabled, the Values and beliefs are important in the young or the aged. This is the social glue that mainstream of Australian political life. How- binds our society together and gives us a ever, there are those in our society who find sense of belonging in our communities. The talk about values abhorrent—the so-called complex social challenges facing our society ‘chattering classes’, the elites whose view of will never be solved by governments work- life is distorted by their inane fixation with ing alone, but in partnership with civil soci- the politics of the lowest common denomina- ety. As a senator, I shall work to foster com- tor, an outdated socialist ideology that rejects munity participation and volunteerism so that a belief in the power of the individual. The individuals, welfare organisations, business

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 105 success of the Howard government has been erals, Rhondda Vanzella, Helen Wayland and to reject this ideology. my many friends and supporters in the My journey began under the shadow of Women’s Council, Robyn and Harry Young, the chimney stack at Port Kembla. It now Mervyn and Ann Youl, and the late Judith takes me back to where I started. I return to Barton. I would also like to thank my staff my roots. My office will be in Wollongong and the many volunteers who have helped and I look forward to giving the people of make this my very special day. the Illawarra an alternative and effective Thank you to my family: Mammina and voice in government. The Illawarra is yet to Pops for your love and selfless sacrifices; realise its full potential. I want to see more Canio, the best brother a girl could ever exports leave Port Kembla, to see more in- have; Karen and my beautiful nephews, dustry developed and more jobs created. I Beppi and Luca; my stepchildren, Alasdair want to ensure that, when my nephews grow and Amelia; my aunt and uncle, cousins and up and look for a job in Wollongong, they their families; my mother-in-law, Frances, will not be forced to move away to find sisters-in-law and their families; and my work, as I was. Future growth for the Illa- husband, John, my biggest fan, for your pa- warra will require all sectors of the commu- tience, understanding, love and support. nity working together with all levels of gov- I have tried to lead the past 25 years of my ernment. I look forward to the challenge. life in service to the community and to the Here tonight there are many friends who public. People often ask me why I want to have helped me to make my journey. I can- serve in public life. For me, the answer is not mention you all by name. You know who simple. My parents came to this country to you are and I thank you wholeheartedly. I build a better life for themselves and for their thank the Liberal Party and the New South children. Their journey is but a snapshot of Wales Division. Over the years, I have had millions of similar journeys. They are not extensive involvement at many levels of the published anywhere except written deep in party and I am honoured to represent the the hearts and memories of those who took Liberal Party as a senator. I would especially the journey and those, like me, who follow like to mention some of my parliamentary them. This country gave my parents so colleagues—Bronwyn Bishop, Helen much—I have always wanted to give some- Coonan, Teresa Gambaro, Bill Heffernan, thing back. And so, as I stand here today, I Jackie Kelly, Nick Minchin, Brendan Nel- honour the journeys of those before me and I son, Alby Schultz and Santo Santoro—and look forward with dedication and resolve to state colleagues—David Clarke, Charlie my journey ahead. Lynn and Anthony Roberts. Thank you for TAX LAWS AMENDMENT (PERSONAL your guidance and support over many years. INCOME TAX REDUCTION) BILL 2005 There are many in the Liberal Party I Second Reading would also like to thank. I would especially Debate resumed. like to acknowledge and thank Nick Camp- bell, Michael Cooke, Alex Hawke, Natasha Senator LEES (South Australia) (5.23 Maclaren and the Young Liberal Movement, pm)—This is not the first time that I have Italo Mazzola and the New South Wales Ital- risen in this place to speak on tax legislation. ian Special Branch, Hollie Nolan, Peter I was heavily and directly involved in the Phelps, Marlene Scott and the Illawarra Lib- major tax package which included the GST back in the late 1990s. At that stage, we had

CHAMBER 106 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 months of committee hearings and long de- to fund our daily needs simply was not able bates. This emphasised very much for me to continue. The states and territories had to that, when we are changing the tax system, it get access to the money they needed to pro- is not something that we should do lightly, vide public services and infrastructure. That without proper consideration or quickly as a has now been done, and we can see the extra response to a particular lobby or pressure money from the GST flowing to schools and group. And it is not something we should do hospitals. There are extra roads, police et simply to implement what is supposedly a cetera. In my home state, there is a raft of publicly popular measure of cutting taxes. positive changes in the way services are be- Tax should be about national and public ing funded. interests as well as individual interests. We Another reason I supported the 1999 should be talking about tax reform and, in package was that we had to remove the hid- particular, about how changes to the system den taxes that were embedded in our manu- impact on various sections of the economy as factured goods and so reduce the cost of well as on individuals. One of my major Australian goods to make Australia more achievements in this place was ensuring that competitive. That has been achieved. But, as those major changes—what became known we made the raft of changes back then, we as the ANTS package—actually went had to ensure that tax reform was socially through this place but that they only went responsible and equitable. Basically, we had through after considerable negotiations and to protect those on low incomes. That was considerable changes so that we did have a done, with some $5 billion of fairness in- package that was environmentally and so- jected into the 1999 GST reform package, cially responsible. and that is what is now being partly undone. Why did I support the tax changes back in By ‘undone’, I mean that we are now losing 1999 when saying no was obviously much a lot of the fairness that was negotiated into easier and a much less risky course to take? Australia’s tax system at that time. There were a number of national priorities In those tax negotiations, we had to boost that could no longer be ignored. Indeed, the pensions and benefits more than the govern- Democrats had already seen this and had ment planned, because they were working on been undertaking a series of tax negotiations averages and that was simply not equitable. and tax discussions across all divisions in all We needed to take food out of the package, states and both territories for some time. That because that has the biggest impact on those led to a party ballot in which the Australian on low incomes, and we had to make a num- Democrats voted to impose a tax on services. ber of other changes, including boosting The ALP also knew that a GST was essential support through SAPs for people who are and that personal income tax cuts would homeless and boosting opportunities for need to go with it, but they chose what they children living on low incomes—in particu- thought at the time was a politically expedi- lar, a childhood nutrition program. All of ent road and opposed the tax package en- those changes were to help those on the bot- tirely. tom rung. In 1999 dollars, we negotiated I will now move on to some of the reasons roughly an extra $7 a fortnight for disability why change was necessary. Governments pensioners, and about $11 for a couple. It could no longer continue to build up debt was more for people who were on single- and/or sell off assets. Borrowing and selling parent benefits. Basically, it had to be an eq- uitable social response to tax changes.

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 107

Under this package, together with changes tion senators who seem so delighted at the to our social security system, many on low prospect of these tax cuts: why should Aus- incomes are going to lose not just once but tralians who are living below the poverty line twice. Firstly, they lose because of the pid- pay any income tax at all? dling tax cuts they get that are barely going I would ask that government senators to keep up with inflation. Secondly, many speaking in support of the Tax Laws people will also lose through the lowering of Amendment (Personal Income Tax Reduc- their incomes with the move from pensions tion) Bill 2005 not mention my name in their to enhanced Newstart. In particular, I men- speeches. Yes, I did support you in the past tion here single parents and those newly di- on tax reform but I do not support what you agnosed with a disability. Many Australians are doing now. This package is simply unfair. who apply for help in the future—when, I It is un-Australian. It is not a fair go for all, must stress here, the Senate will be in gov- as our most recent senator just noted. It may ernment hands and therefore compliant— well be supported very vocally by some in will be actually worse off. In 1999, those of the media, but that does not make it right and us who worked constructively with this gov- it does not mean we have to go along with it. ernment on tax reform also succeeded in re- I will oppose these changes wherever I can. ducing the tax cuts that were then planned Yes, the tax cuts are going through, but they for the wealthy. We rolled those back. That is will not have my vote and they will not have certainly being undone with this package my name on them. before us now. Senator BOSWELL (Queensland— I am not arguing—indeed, I do not think Leader of The Nationals in the Senate) (5.31 anyone in this place is arguing—that we do pm)—I am disappointed that Senator Lees not need tax cuts. We do need them. Inflation will not support taxation cuts for many, has taken care of that; it is a certainty. But a many Australians. I cannot understand it. I tax system should be fair, and any changes can understand someone putting up an alter- that we make to that system should be as- native point of view. The Tax Laws Amend- sessed as to whether they are fair or not. In ment (Personal Income Tax Reduction) Bill this case we see that those who desperately 2005 implements the tax cuts announced in need tax cuts get few, if any. the May budget for all Australian workers. What we actually need now is tax reform, Some get more than others, but all Australian not just tax cuts. It is not logical, as some workers get a benefit. The bill ensures that have argued—including some in this place— the top tax rate applies only to three per cent to say that we have to give people more in- of the working population. That is something centives at the top by giving them more tax that everyone has been pushing for, includ- cuts and giving them more money in their ing Bill Shorten, who is supposed to be the pockets and that the way to give incentive to new saviour of the Labor Party. He has said those Australians who are already struggling quite openly: is to reduce what they have in their pockets, ... the maximum marginal income tax rate cuts in to cut their incomes. I have great difficulty at a relatively low-income level, which harms when I try to follow the arguments about work incentives and skill acquisition. Effective how this can possibly be reasonable and fair. marginal tax rates also remain high for low- These tax bills are a great disappointment as income earners, deterring participation by secon- I leave this place. Certainly the changes to dary earners and older workers. social security legislation are. I ask opposi-

CHAMBER 108 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

He has even suggested that the government things that I believed were wrong and all the needs to perform radical surgery—in fact, it things that I thought would happen to the could even need to apply the death penalty— ALP have happened. on the tax regime. The government has lis- Mr Beazley, stuck there like a rabbit tened to one of the leading lights and the caught in a spotlight, does not know which hope of the Labor side, Bill Shorten, and has way to move. One of the things I learnt when actually done what this new leading figure of I first got into parliament was: if you cannot the ALP wishes—and has got kicked in the say something, never go on television, be- head by the ALP in this place. I do not want cause you look ineffective and weak. I do not to condemn all members of the ALP, because think anyone looked weaker and more inef- there are many in the ALP who think it is fective than the Leader of the Opposition on absolutely ridiculous to deny Australians tax the 7.30 Report last Wednesday or Thursday cuts. Peter Beattie says: night. He has been handed something that he We welcome the tax cuts. They are the right thing just cannot handle. I do not blame him for to do. I make no apology for saying that ... not being able to handle it, because no-one That is what he told state parliament. He is a could handle the poisoned chalice that the successful leader. Clare Martin, the Northern Labor Party’s economic spokesmen have Territory Chief Minister, said she made it given him. It was a disaster. clear to the Northern Territory federal repre- I thought the ALP and Senator Conroy sentatives that they should support the would come storming into the Senate today budget on behalf of Territorians. She said: to defend their position. In fact, I mentioned But that is the Federal Budget, and I wouldn’t be it in the joint party room. I said: ‘Beware of opposing tax cuts. the attack. They’ll have to defend this.’ I was She said: expecting a barrage on tax cuts at question ... every Australian will be looking forward to time. I do not think there was one question them, every territorian. bowled up to any of the economic ministers Geoff Gallop said: about tax cuts. I said to the party room—and I hope I am not disclosing any confidences: If we look at the tax cuts, which I think are excel- ‘There will be a line-up of ALP speakers a lent—and we have been advocating that for some time. They’re essentially built off the back of the mile long, coming in here to defend what WA economy. The hard work of the West Austra- many of them think to be the indefensible.’ lian people, the strength of our economy, has What have we seen on the speakers list? I given Peter Costello the surplus he needs to de- think there are three speakers: Senator Con- liver these tax cuts. roy will be one, Senator Evans will be an- So he wants them. Everyone wants them— other and there is one other floating around. everyone except Wayne Swan, Senator Con- Senator Evans has to be up for it, to defend roy and a few others in here. I made an inap- the position. Senator Conroy is an economic propriate comment when I first heard about spokesman. He, too, will have to defend the what was happening with the Labor Party position. But they could only muster three refusing to back these tax cuts. I could not people—three kamikaze pilots. That is all understand it. I have been in politics for they could muster: a squadron of three. something like 30 years and it just seemed to I am surprised. After 30 years of political me to be the most stupid, idiotic thing that I life, I cannot understand how anyone could have ever seen done by an opposition. All the deny the people of Australia a tax cut. What

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 109 the ALP has forgotten, or has never under- to $75,000 a year with all the benefits. What stood, is that there are many Australians that are you going to cost them? It is around $25 traditionally vote for the ALP who are on a week. Twenty-five dollars a week is a lot of $60,000 and above. There are many of them. money to people that are living away from Many of them are in Capricornia, a seat that the cities, living away from the benefits that the ALP has held and holds now. They are many people get in the cities, and where scattered right throughout Australia. In the things are more expensive. What are you mining industry, $93,000 is a starting rate. doing? Don’t you understand that it is not Many people fly in, work two weeks in a only the minimum wage worker that backs row—12 hours a day, seven days a week— the ALP? There are many workers in the ab- and then come home and have a week at attoir industry. home. They really work hard for their I could nominate quite a number of people money. They are traditional ALP supporters, out there—for example, truck drivers—that or they were. How can you deny those peo- live out in the bush, that are rural and re- ple a tax cut? Those people start on a salary gional dwellers, that earn reasonable money. of $93,000 and their salaries go up with the They work hard for the money. They roll up skills that they develop. The people that their sleeves and they really get into it. An drive those big draglines are probably on interstate truck driver might be on $75,000 to $120,000 or $130,000 a year. Those skills are $95,000 a year. He will lose $96 per month. needed, they are appreciated and they are Do you really expect that these people are paid for. What are you denying those people? going to vote for you? I cannot believe how For a person on say, $90,000, you are taking anyone could get themselves in such an un- $40 a week away from them. That is $40 a believable mess—and neither can most peo- week that they work damn hard for. They fly ple in the ALP. There are many unsourced in, work 12 hours a day, seven days a week, quotes from people in the ALP. I will find day in, day out for two weeks, sometimes them in a minute. I cannot understand how three weeks, and then go home for a week. the ALP thinks it can ignore and walk away You are taking $40 a week away from those from not only the workers who are going to people, from the people who support the earn $6 extra a week—$6 dollars is not a lot economy of Australia, the mining industry of of money, but it is worth having—but also, Australia—the coalminers, the people that when you start getting to $20 and $30 a drive the draglines, the other miners. It is week, the skilled abattoir workers and min- very hard, it is very nasty. It is hard yakka, ers. What about the waterside workers that and it carries a certain element of danger load beef or sugar in Mackay? Those sorts of with it. people are on around $80,000 a year with I am also concerned about the abattoir their overtime. They are going to be $170 workers. You would not find, if you went worse off. I do not know how you can come around all of Australia, an industry that sup- into this place and defend it. ports the ALP more than meatworkers do. In October last year an election took place And what have you done to them? A lot of and the government ran hard on its economic those people do earn incomes between performance. It not only won an additional $25,000 and $55,000, but the skilled work- four or five seats but also won, for the first ers, the boners, the foremen, the top work- time since 1974, control of the Senate. Is ers—the people that can work on the chain there any more striking example of the peo- and keep the chain running—are on $65,000 ple supporting this government because they

CHAMBER 110 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 believe in its economic performance? Is one seat where I now do not believe you will there any more striking example of igno- get a vote from the mining industry or the rance than trying to take these tax cuts away? abattoirs. There will be the true believers I have never seen it before and I do not think who will hang on—those whom you could I will ever see it again. There is a certain walk over, kick in the head and flog and who point where a party becomes unelectable. I would still vote for you. You have virtually think you have just about reached the point done that. You have left every rural and re- where a party becomes unelectable. The de- gional worker—and there are many, many of cisions you have made on these tax cuts are them who spend many hours of their lives so reprehensible that no-one can understand with their sleeves rolled up to get into that them. higher bracket of income tax, paying it all The people who are battling want their $6 out in tax and, as Bill Shorten has said, find- a week. The people who are out there with ing no incentive to work—and you have their sleeves rolled up driving huge dragline walked away from them. There is only one machines, scooping up the wealth for Austra- result from that: if you walk away from your lia, putting it in trucks, taking it down to the constituency, they will walk away from you ports, loading it on the ports and working 12 at the next election. hours a day seven days a week have been Debate (on motion by Senator Faulkner) neglected by the ALP. You say that you are adjourned. trying to create a difference. You have cer- NOTICES tainly done that. You have created the great- Presentation est difference—between a government that has economic credentials and an opposition Senator FAULKNER (New South that, economically, cannot add up at all. Wales) (5.47 pm)—by leave—I give notice that on the next day of sitting I shall move: There are many, many workers in rural and regional Australia who are traditionally That the time for the presentation of the report ALP supporters. They are the people who of the Standing Committee of Privileges on whether, and if so what, acts of unauthorised dis- have held the faith. They have stuck by you. closure of parliamentary committee proceedings, They have not come over to The Nationals or evidence or draft reports should continue to be the Liberal Party as yet. They have held the included among prohibited acts which may be line. You have walked away from those in treated by the Senate as contempts, be extended the bush. You have never given them good to 21 June 2005. representation. You do not even put up a rea- TAX LAWS AMENDMENT (PERSONAL sonable candidate. You put up the name of INCOME TAX REDUCTION) BILL 2005 some union hack from Brisbane and then go Second Reading out and try to say you are running in Ma- ranoa, Kennedy or somewhere else. You Debate resumed. walked away from them politically and now Senator CONROY (Victoria) (5.48 you have walked away from them economi- pm)—Today in this debate on the Tax Laws cally. Amendment (Personal Income Tax Reduc- I thought that Capricornia was a seat that tion) Bill 2005 Labor draws a clear dividing we could not win. We can win it on big line between the opposition and an increas- swings. I would now say that you have ingly arrogant coalition government. We do opened that seat up for The Nationals. It is so on behalf of millions of hardworking Aus- tralians on low to middle incomes who are

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 111 crying out for some tax relief after years of bor was dismayed on budget night to see that being squeezed by the highest taxing gov- the government could spend $22 billion on ernment that this country has ever known. In tax cuts but find a tax cut of only $6 per 2005-06 tax revenue is forecast to hit $235 week for seven million Australian workers billion. Tax paid per taxpayer has increased on incomes between $30,000 and $60,000. by $12,200 since the Howard government We have come to expect arrogance from came to power. There can be no doubt that this government, and this Treasurer in par- tax reform is required. ticular, but a new low was established on Unfortunately, that is not what the tax budget night. The Treasurer decided to court changes contained in this legislation deliver. the votes of the coalition backbench in the The measures contained in this bill fail every forthcoming leadership battle by giving them test of decent tax reform. They are mon- a tax cut of $65 a week while giving the strously unfair, enriching the wealthy few at typical hardworking nurse or teacher a mea- the expense of millions of hardworking Aus- sly $6. Surging revenues allowed the gov- tralians. They represent a wasted opportunity ernment to serve up a tax cut feast on budget to reform the tax system in a way that pro- night, but the vast majority of Australian motes economic growth by encouraging workers were only offered the scraps from work force participation. They also threaten the table. to overheat the economy at a time when the The top 10 per cent of taxpayers will Reserve Bank has already issued warnings pocket around 45 per cent of the tax cuts. that a strong consumer demand and capacity Only around three per cent of taxpayers will constraints may force it to raise interest rates. receive the maximum tax cut. That is right: For these reasons, Labor has consistently three per cent of taxpayers will receive the stated since budget night that it does not top tax cut. And this is from a Liberal Party support the Howard government’s inequita- that promised in 1996 to govern for all of us. ble and economically irresponsible tax plan. The Australian people have learned from But Labor has not just opposed the govern- bitter experience over the years that the coa- ment’s flawed legislation; it has also devel- lition’s definition of ‘all of us’ is a very nar- oped an alternative proposal. It is a plan that row one. In the case of these tax cuts it in- more fairly distributes tax relief. It is a plan cludes lawyers, stockbrokers and the coali- that will encourage people to move from tion backbench, but it excludes workers on welfare to work and provide increased incen- average incomes. tive to work right across the income spec- There are only five federal electorates in trum, not just at the top. It is a plan that this country where the average worker will minimises the danger that tax cuts will fuel receive more than $6 per week. These are the inflationary pressures at this stage of the blue-ribbon seats of Warringah, North Syd- economic cycle and force the Reserve Bank ney, Higgins, Bradfield and Wentworth. to further increase interest rates. Shame on you, Senator McGauran; shame on Before talking about Labor’s alternative, I you! The government would like to have the would like to take some time to detail some public believe that low- and middle-income of the flaws in the government’s proposal. I earners have been looked after in previous will start with the rank unfairness of the tax budgets, but this claim just does not stand cuts announced by the Treasurer in last up. Since the GST was introduced five years month’s budget. Like many Australians, La- ago, people on average incomes have re-

CHAMBER 112 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 ceived tax cuts of just $10 per week. In con- threshold for the top marginal rate would be trast, if this legislation is passed, taxpayers lifted by $20,000 to $100,000. This would on $125,000 will have received tax cuts deliver a worker earning $100,000 a $40 per amounting to $119 per week. That is right: week tax cut. Labor’s plan differs from that people on average incomes will have re- of the government in that workers earning ceived $10 from this government, but if you over $100,000 would receive around a third earned $125,000-plus you will have received less in tax cuts than the government has pro- $119 per week. posed. In successive budgets the Howard gov- Of course Labor’s plan has not been popu- ernment has attacked the progressivity of the lar with the Treasurer and his sycophantic tax system. Who could forget last year’s supporters—not that there are many, as Sena- budget where the 80 per cent of workers tor Minchin worked so assiduously to en- earning under $52,000 received no tax cut at sure—who have been salivating at the pros- all? Since budget night, Labor have consis- pect of a massive tax cut delivered at the tently argued that the distribution of tax cuts expense of low- and middle-income workers. was not fair and that we would not support Some sections of the media in particular the Treasurer’s proposal. Two days after the have displayed incredible double standards. budget, Kim Beazley unveiled Labor’s plan Two years ago, the pathetic $4 sandwich- for fairer tax cuts. For around the same cost and-milkshake tax cuts were widely and jus- as the government’s tax plan and its changes tifiably condemned. This time around, with to the superannuation surcharge, Labor pro- average taxpayers receiving just a $6 tax cut, duced a proposal that would double the tax the same commentators have dubbed the cut delivered to workers on incomes between Treasurer a working-class hero and a genius. $30,000 and $60,000. That is right: double What could possibly explain this inability to the tax cut. Under Labor’s plan, from 1 Janu- maintain a consistent analysis of tax policy? ary 2006 the threshold where the 30 per cent Despite the inability of some sections of the marginal rate cuts in would be raised by media to see past the fistful of dollars, Labor $4,800, from $21,600 to $26,400. This is confident that its proposals for fairer tax change would deliver workers on average cuts are well supported by the community. incomes a tax cut of $12 per week. In July Senators need only look to today’s Daily 2006, Labor would increase the threshold Telegraph to see an indication of this sup- where the 42 per cent marginal rate cuts in port. A loaded question was posed: should by $4,000, from $63,000 to $67,000. Labor delay the government’s tax cuts? It Labor is also concerned that the tax sys- could not be more pejorative. It was not, ‘Do tem should be internationally competitive. you want Labor’s $12 tax cut or the govern- Under the existing tax legislation, the thresh- ment’s $6 tax cut?’ That would be a fairer old for the top marginal tax rate will be question. A loaded question—should Labor $80,000 in 2005-06. This threshold kicks in delay the government’s tax cuts?—attracted at around 1.5 times average earnings. Labor the support of 52 per cent of those surveyed. believes that this is just too low. Many That is right. The vast majority of working skilled workers are now subject to this high Australians—the seven million Australians rate of tax. Eighty thousand dollars is not a who know they are getting only $6—are not lot of money in cities like Sydney and Mel- fooled. They are not sucked in by the head- bourne where housing costs have skyrock- lines that the newspapers are running. They eted. Under Labor’s plan, from July 2006 the are not sucked in by the Treasurer’s postur-

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 113 ing, while he preens himself to try to get seven million Australians.’ This controversy votes from the coalition, to try to see if he about the schedules has just been a sideshow needs to move out of the phone box of sup- orchestrated by the Treasurer to deflect atten- port. They are not fooled; they understand tion from his unjust tax proposals. the difference between $6 and $12. They We have also been told by the government understand the difference between a party that Labor’s position is based on the politics committed to fairness and a party committed of envy. Our opponents seek to deny the le- to looking after its own. Imagine if the ques- gitimacy and relevance of principles such as tion had been fairly and accurately phrased equity and fairness in the tax debate. Let me to something like ‘Do you support Labor’s assure the Senate and those listening today: plan to double the weekly tax cut to seven this is a proposition that Labor simply cannot million Australian workers?’ Can you imag- and will not accept. High-income earners are ine the response? We dare the Daily Tele- not the only group of Australians working graph to ask that question. hard and deserving some tax relief. The Unlike some in the media, the Treasurer is Treasurer misjudged the Australian Labor aware of the flaws in his tax plan. He has not Party if he thought that we would support wanted to debate the merits of his tax pro- this proposal. Labor members were not put posal against Labor’s alternative proposal. in this place to wave through proposals such Peter Costello, the Treasurer, has sought to as the one we have before us today. We have distract attention from his unfair tax changes put forward a fairer alternative, and we will by talking incessantly about the tax sched- be challenging coalition senators to vote in ules and when they will come into effect. the interests of the seven million constituents Senator Minchin has been doing exactly the rather than in their own self-interest. same: ‘Let’s avoid the substance of the de- In addition to being monstrously unfair, bate. Let’s not talk about the seven million the government’s tax package is also eco- Australians who could get $12 from Labor as nomically irresponsible. It comes at the ex- opposed to $6 from the government.’ Labor pense of measures to strengthen the Austra- has simply said, ‘Let’s put first things first.’ lian economy. For people paying off a mort- If our amendments are passed by the Senate gage, it enhances the risk that the Reserve and this government is shamed into giving Bank will be forced to raise interest rates to Australian workers the tax cuts they deserve, deal with inflationary pressures caused by those tax schedules would be incorrect. De- strong consumer demand and capacity con- manding that Labor vote for them, when the straints. Australia needs tax reform, not just tax schedules are subordinate legislation, is tax cuts. The government forfeited the putting the cart before the horse. The long chance to institute real tax reform; instead, it established practice of this parliament is that took the opportunity to reward its political we debate primary legislation—that is, base of high-income earners. bills—before considering any instruments The Treasury has repeatedly advised of purporting to give effect to those bills. the need to increase work force participation It has been a scam by the Treasurer, it has if economic growth is to be sustained as the been a scam by Senator Minchin and it has population ages. The government’s tax cuts been a scam by the Prime Minister: ‘Do any- ignore the economic imperative to address thing, say anything, just don’t let anyone the demographic challenge facing Australia. notice that we are offering only half the tax In contrast, Labor’s plan is not only fairer cuts that the Labor Party are offering to

CHAMBER 114 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 but also more economically efficient. A key force the Reserve Bank to raise interest rates. feature of Labor’s plan is the introduction of Low- and middle-income mortgagees are a new low-income Welfare to Work bonus. well aware that any increase in interest rates For people earning up to $20,000 per year, would quickly swallow up any tax relief. the low-income and Welfare to Work tax off- During the last election campaign the coali- set would deliver an effective tax-free tion made much of its promise to keep inter- threshold of $10,000. This would reduce the est rates low. At the same time in the run-up crippling effective marginal tax rates for to last year’s election the government en- those on low incomes. Currently, single al- gaged in a reckless $66 billion spending lowance recipients can face effective mar- spree to buy its way back into power. Labor ginal tax rates of up to 75c in the dollar. That warned then that mortgagees would pay the is right: 75c in the dollar. price for the government’s irresponsible fis- Single income families with dependants cal policy. In March the seeds sown by the can face effective marginal tax rates of over government in 2004 bore their bitter fruit 100 per cent. The new tax offset proposed by when the Reserve Bank lifted interest rates Labor would phase out at a taper rate of five by 0.25 per cent. There is macho man, Fi- per cent. Under Labor’s proposal, in 2006-07 nance Minister Minchin, who allowed this workers earning up to $31,000 would benefit runaway spending. What did you think when from the tax offset. This tax offset tackles the you passed up to the Prime Minister for his problem of high effective marginal tax rates campaign speech, ‘Here, pick one from these faced by welfare recipients returning to six or seven options,’ and he took the lot? work. These measures will strengthen the You laugh, but you should be ashamed of Australian economy by enhancing labour yourself. The hard man of the Liberal Party force participation. right wing! (Time expired) As my colleague the shadow Treasurer has Senator McGAURAN (Victoria) (6.08 noted, the economic literature on labour sup- pm)—I also join this debate on the Tax Laws ply elasticity indicates that low-income Amendment (Personal Income Tax Reduc- workers are more likely to be responsive to tion) Bill 2005, which in reality comprises, incentives than high-income earners. That is as the debate is showing today, the tax cuts right, Senator McGauran—that is the eco- announced on budget night. We all know, nomic literature. If you choose to look be- Senator Minchin, better than anyone sitting yond your own vested self-interest, the eco- in cabinet, that tax is often a pious debate at nomic literature is clear: low-income work- the best of times. We heard the Democrats ers are more likely to be responsive to incen- outdoing the Labor Party in their bidding. It tives than high-income earners. But do not is often a bidding war, and we know, what- let the facts get in the way of a good bit of ever tax cuts we put up, even the public political bull. In other words, if you want to would want more than is delivered. It is often increase labour force participation, you get a pious debate, but nothing could have been far more bang for your buck by focusing tax more pious than Senator Conroy’s speech reform on reducing effective marginal tax here today. It absolutely takes the cake. He rates for low-income earners. This is the ap- has outdone the two other speakers from the proach that Labor has taken. non-government side. Senator Conroy has delivered something more pious and more Labor is also concerned that tax cuts fake than the other two, who did a very good should not add to inflationary pressures and job. He hid behind some Telegraph poll, if

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 115 we are meant to believe the figures of that. I As Senator Boswell said, you have almost will be checking the Telegraph later on. He reached the stage where you have become mentioned a Telegraph poll. He called the unelectable. I remember that when we were government’s tax cuts a scam. in opposition there was a ridiculous stage we The second speaker, Senator Sherry, en- had reached—never so bad as this, of course; ters the chamber. The Labor Party only had we knew never to deny the Australian people three speakers. You are never short of getting a tax cut of any sort—in 1993, which Senator speakers in the Senate. It is the place of de- Boswell will remember, where we would not bate. It has been the most filibustering, ob- take any amendment cuts on the Native Title structionist Senate for the nine years of this Bill. That is when you know you have been government. We are never short of getting in opposition too long. My point is that you Labor Party speakers to come in here day reach a stage where you really do become and night. The backbench would queue up. unelectable. You become so obstructionist, In fact, it was very hard to get a government so caught up in your own internal politics, so speaker on before one o’clock at night some- idiotic and political that you cannot see the times. But today what do we have? Three wood for the trees. That is the stage that you speakers joined the debate. I was shocked. In have reached today in denying the tax cuts to fact, The Nationals contributed two speakers the Australian people. Senator Conroy is ab- to the Labor Party’s three. What a joke. I had solutely correct: we utterly misjudged you. to rush this speech through. I turned up this We never thought you would do this. morning knowing I had a tax speech, proba- Senator Conroy finished his 20-minute bly about 10 o’clock tonight by normal ex- contribution by raising the fact that the gov- perience— ernment promised during the election period Senator Sherry—Get on with it—talk to spend $66 billion on commitments and about tax. promises, which we are fully committed to and are fulfilling—in the last budget all those Senator McGAURAN—What I am try- promises were met. He finished by saying ing to point out, Senator Sherry, as you say, that that was a threat to low interest rates and ‘Get on with the debate’—I will—is that you that the Reserve Bank has sent out that warn- have lost support from your own backbench. ing, as if to say we should not even be intro- None of them will come forward and argue ducing any tax cuts. I know those cuts were a the indefensible. They know this is ridicu- big surprise to the Labor Party on budget lous and the sooner it is over the better; the night. It caught them flat-footed. It caught less said the better. That is the new approach the shadow minister, Mr Swan, flat-footed to this tax debate. Senator Sherry tried. The and caught Mr Smith and obviously Mr only thing Senator Conroy did was not come Beazley totally flat-footed. So they went into in here with his usual over the top style of what they instinctively know, and that is to debating, because even he has been quelled object, to go into their negative mode. They on this. It is absolutely absurd. Senator Con- were caught flat-footed, so much so that they roy claims that we have misjudged the Labor decided to reject these tax cuts. Party and the tactic that they would take in blocking this tax cut. He is right. We utterly So Senator Conroy—just to finish that misjudged the Labor Party, that the Labor point on Senator Conroy and move on from Party would be so stupid, so idiotic, so dan- his idiotic speech—was suggesting that tax gerous. cuts actually feed into higher interest rates, and the Reserve Bank have sent out that

CHAMBER 116 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 warning. So what he is really saying is that sympathy with regard to secondary boycotts their offer is not really an offer at all. If the or anything like that? No. That reform has Labor Party ever got into government, no- brought peace and harmony to the economy, one would believe that they would deliver. but the Labor Party were against our initial Even so, the suggestion that the tax cuts industrial relations reform. would feed into higher interest rates is ri- In the area of welfare we have introduced diculous. mutual obligation and we have targeted wel- The truth of the matter is that these tax fare fraud. The Labor Party were against cuts announced on budget night were unex- that, yet that was all part of producing a sur- pected but indeed most welcome. Unlike the plus budget and being responsible economi- Labor Party, who were caught flat-footed on cally. It is the same with regard to the Medi- the night, we actually had a structure, a phi- care safety net, and so it goes on in the area losophy and a policy behind it all. As the of education. You are even against reforms to Treasurer said in his speech, setting out the support rural and regional areas such as Re- philosophy behind these tax cuts: gional Partnerships. I am sure—you can re- After we balance our budget, reduce Labor’s mind me, Senator Boswell—that just about debt, and fund our services we should reduce everything in the rural and regional area that taxes as far as is prudent. we put up has been obstructed by the Labor So it is quite obvious that the philosophy Party in this house, either by filibustering or behind these tax cuts is like a dividend to the by voting it down. Australian people. Good economic manage- You have paid a high price for that, just as ment right from our first budget, our first you will pay a high price for your rejection tough budget in 1996, allows us to pay these and obstruction of these personal income tax dividends. In fact, I would go so far as to say cuts. The price you paid at the last election that the Treasurer’s 10th budget was his best. was the highest yet. Political pundits proba- He increased spending in all portfolios. He bly though that they would never see the day reduced debt, which will be zero by 2007. in modern politics when a government would What government can increase spending, again hold the majority in the Senate. How reduce debt, cut taxes and maintain the re- wrong they were. When the opposition get so form momentum all at the same time? This weak and put up such a dangerous leader, do was the Treasurer’s finest budget ever, his you really think you are going to put that finest hour, and we are proud to say that he over the Australian people? That is where we was able to include these tax cuts. will be after 1 July. That is the answer the On each occasion the government got to Australian people gave you at the last elec- the point where we were able to offer these tion: they told you to get your economic tax cuts as they came along because we took management in order. You are not listening. the first tough steps in 1996 and have in You have not listened. If this is your re- every budget since. But the Labor Party, sponse then we are likely to increase our ma- from 1996, have objected to every reform jority in the Senate after the next election. this government have tried to introduce. To That is the price you paid at the last election; date you have rejected our industrial rela- you are heading down the same track again. tions reform, but has anyone heard of any But far be it from me to give you gratuitous strikes down at the waterfront lately? Has advice. I am quite enjoying the level of ab- anyone noticed the country going out in surdity that the opposition have reached.

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 117

Senator Buckland sits over there as Opposi- been in the Federal Labor Caucus I would have tion Whip— been advising them not to block the tax cuts. Senator Boswell—The wise old owl. He also said: Senator McGAURAN—a wise old owl … nor would I have said, if I had the opportunity who is probably glad he is getting out on 1 in the Federal Labor caucus, that it was a smart July so he can go home to his farm and make political tactic to block the tax cuts. It is never a smart political tactic to do that. a bit of money on his cattle and contemplate the good sense that the cattle have—more As you know, the Western Australian Pre- than there is in the caucus room. The Labor mier has also given you similar advice, as Party have learnt nothing at all in nine years. has none other than Bill Shorten, the up and You have paid a high price. If the Labor comer— Party cannot get sense out of the shadow Senator Boswell—The hope of the side! Treasurer, Mr Swan, why don’t you listen to Senator McGAURAN—the hope of the those that have had experience in govern- side, the man being groomed to take over the ment and know the degree of difficulty in Labor Party reins—the new or the next Bob running an economy and, when the rewards Hawke, which is how Senator Ray and Sena- are there, how you should take them? Why tor Conroy are attempting to groom him. At don’t you listen to Paul Lennon, the Premier least, that is what I think they are doing; of Tasmania? Let me quote what he said unless he too is going to ride right over the about the tax cuts. top of them. But he had some wise words to Senator Boswell—A good man. say. He put it quite simply, saying that his Senator McGAURAN—Yes, Senator own union and all tradesmen will benefit Boswell, he certainly was when it came to from these tax cuts. It is an absolute fallacy forestry issues. I just noticed Senator Brown what the Labor Party is selling, that these tax over there; I must thank him for his strong cuts are not directed to the working man and stance in the area of forestry at the last elec- woman of Australia. They are directed to the tion. It certainly sucked in Mr Latham and heart of the working man and woman. If you the Labor Party. I must thank him for the listen to Bill Shorten, he said in the Austra- lack of reality that he has contributed to the lian on 3 May: Labor Party. Senator Brown ignores me, but Some steelworkers I know at a OneSteel fabri- he knows only too well that it was his advice cation plant are doing something about Australia’s to the last leader of the Labor Party—we rotten tax system. Having calculated how much await his book coming out in October; that they can earn before paying the top income tax rate ... in the dollar, they simply refuse to work should be another fine read!—and his lack of any overtime that pushes them above the limit. reality and the Greens’ lack of reality that led to the absurdity that we had in Tasmania with … … … regard to forestry policy. Paul Lennon, the The top marginal income tax rate thresholds Premier of Tasmania then and now, rejected should be raised to create a fair, productive and the Labor Party policy on old-growth forests, competitive tax system. as he rejects your policy on tax cuts. He is That is what the tax announcement has done. standing up to you, in other words. This is That is Bill Shorten talking to you from what he had to say: within your own party, a man who is from … at the end of the day the Tasmanian commu- the union and has all the credentials to be nity wants the tax cuts delivered. And … had I able to influence you, but what do you

CHAMBER 118 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 choose? You choose to listen to Mr Swan. I tax culture. It is a simple cliche but it sums have a strong suspicion it may well be the you up: a big-spending, big-taxing party— last time that the Labor Party listen to Mr that is what you were in government and that Swan—I would say that would be the last is what you will be. This is just a facade, just time. It is just a matter of time before Mr a front you are putting up to posture, know- Swan is graciously, I suspect, moved on. ing you will never have to deliver. The truth of the matter is that this gov- As the last speaker I can see that my col- ernment has a record of tax reform. We have leagues want to get to the vote on this. Let us undertaken major tax reform. There have test the mettle. Let us see if those back- been income tax cuts in 2000, 2003, 2004 benchers who have been hiding all day from and 2005. We have cut company tax, we this whole debate front up and vote. You have halved capital gains tax and we had the watch them: when this debate is over and the courage to fundamentally restructure the tax bill is through the Senate, they will all be system and go to the people in the 1998 elec- back on the speakers list, pontificating. But tion with the GST, which included income when it comes to important issues like dol- tax cuts. We had the courage like no other lars in the pockets of the Australian people, government to face the Australian people where are they? They skedaddle. Their first with regard to the GST, which cut wholesale loyalty is to the Labor Party, the Labor cau- sales tax and taxes from exporters and so on. cus. It is not to their electorate, not to the The Australian people had confidence in us, Australian people and not to building an in- and we brought that system in in 2000. So centive into the economy; it is to their own we are a continuing reform government— personal caucus. You have paid a high price unlike the Labor Party, who, when they were in the past and you will continue to pay a in government, simply increased taxes. They high price for the decision you are going to increased company tax—first you decreased make today. it and then you could not take that, so you Senator MINCHIN (South Australia— increased it. In just about every budget you Minister for Finance and Administration) increased wholesale sales taxes. You jacked (6.26 pm)—I wrap up this second reading up the excise tax on petrol in just about every debate on the Tax Laws Amendment (Per- single budget until you got sick of the politi- sonal Income Tax Reduction) Bill 2005 by cal reaction to that and then you simply in- thanking all those who have spoken on the dexed it. bill, particularly my colleagues Senator But personal income tax reform goes Boswell and Senator McGauran. I want to down in political folklore and political leg- make a couple of points. I guess the Labor end with regard to the l-a-w law tax cuts. Party in their private moments would now You promised, before an election, major per- accept that they made a terrible mistake on sonal income tax cuts. You legislated for it— budget night to decide to vote against the it was law to deliver those tax cuts. Then you government tax cuts. It is one thing to rhet- had the nerve on the other side of the 1993 orically claim that the tax cuts are unfair or election to come in here and overturn the law whatever it is that the Labor Party believe— on personal income tax cuts—a promise on that is fair enough; that is democracy—but which people had voted for you. Of course, clearly it was an enormous error of political you introduced the fringe benefits tax and the judgment, for which the Labor Party have capital gains tax and so it goes on. So your paid a very high price, to rush to a decision whole culture is shown up here today—your on budget night and say that they would do

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 119 what they are about to do and seek effec- (The Acting Deputy President—Senator tively to block our tax cuts. JC Cherry) The ancillary point is that I would have Ayes………… 2 thought the Labor Party in particular would Noes………… 48 have some great reservations about doing Majority……… 46 that. We are a government that have just been re-elected with a swing in our favour. I AYES would have thought that that does give us in Brown, B.J. Nettle, K. * a democracy, as the duly elected govern- NOES ment, the right to bring down a budget, pro- pose our tax cuts and not have the power of Barnett, G. Bishop, T.M. Boswell, R.L.D. Brandis, G.H. the Senate used to try to stop those tax cuts Buckland, G. Campbell, G. being brought into effect. That is, in effect, to Carr, K.J. Chapman, H.G.P. announce to the public that you are going to Cherry, J.C. Colbeck, R. block a central part of the budget of the Collins, J.M.A. Conroy, S.M. newly re-elected government. I would have Crossin, P.M. Denman, K.J. thought the Labor Party of all parties would Eggleston, A. * Ferguson, A.B. Ferris, J.M. Fifield, M.P. have thought that was inappropriate. Never- Forshaw, M.G. Greig, B. theless, we will go through this debate. We Harris, L. Humphries, G. will see if the Senate does effectively block Johnston, D. Kemp, C.R. these proposals. Kirk, L. Knowles, S.C. I would like to conclude these remarks by Lees, M.H. Lightfoot, P.R. Ludwig, J.W. Lundy, K.A. thanking the Democrats, the Greens and the Marshall, G. Mason, B.J. Independent senators on behalf of the gov- McGauran, J.J.J. McLucas, J.E. ernment for at least acknowledging the de- Minchin, N.H. Moore, C. mocratic right of the duly elected govern- Murray, A.J.M. O’Brien, K.W.K. ment to give effect to its proposals for tax Ray, R.F. Ridgeway, A.D. cuts by announcing that they will not support Santoro, S. Scullion, N.G. any disallowance of the proposed tax sched- Sherry, N.J. Stephens, U. Tchen, T. Troeth, J.M. ule to give effect to those tax cuts. I think it Watson, J.O.W. Webber, R. has left the Labor Party in a terrible position. * denotes teller I gather Mr Beazley has still not said Question negatived. whether or not he will move disallowance of those tax schedules in this chamber. So I Original question agreed to. thank, on behalf of all Australian taxpayers, Bill read a second time. the minor parties and the Independents for In Committee recognising the reality of the prerogative of a Bill—by leave—taken as a whole. duly elected government to give effect to its vision for tax reform in this country. Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) (6.39 pm)—I am going to assume, Minister Question put: Minchin and shadow minister Sherry, that That the amendment (Senator Nettle’s) be you pretty well understand the arguments we agreed to. have put. I do not intend to repeat my re- The Senate divided. [6.34 pm] marks at length. We are going to move amendment (1), and if this amendment goes

CHAMBER 120 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 down we will then move amendments (2) to-work possibilities, lift disposable income and (3). Of course, if by some miracle and living standards considerably and lessen amendment (1) got up, then we would not the pressure on the minimum wage case. We need to move amendments (2) and (3). So are not averse to high-income earners getting that is how they will be dealt with. I there- tax cuts; we just do not believe that they fore move Democrat amendment (1): should get them first. We have spelt out that (1) Schedule 1, item 1, page 3 (lines 5 to before position very clearly in our various press line 8), omit the item, substitute: releases and it was also spelt out in the 1 Clause 1 of Part I of Schedule 7 (table) speech I made earlier today in the second Repeal table item 1, substitute: reading debate on the bill. 1 exceeds $10,000 but does 17% Our structural reform proposal over a not exceed $21,600 number of years would be to raise the tax- Amendment (1) is a quite simple item. It free threshold, certainly to this $10,000 we increases the tax-free threshold from the pre- are putting here today and then to $12,500, sent $6,000 to $10,000. The effect of that which is the poverty or minimum subsistence would be to provide a tax cut of $680 a year line, and then towards $20,000, which only to everyone earning over $10,000—everyone some retired Australians presently get the earning under $10,000 will not be subject to benefit of. We argue that the income tax rates income tax. There would then be an addi- should be indexed. We argue that raising the tional 400,000 taxpayers presently paying top rate—and I have suggested $120,000, tax who would no longer pay tax. You would which is not far away from the government’s therefore end up with some 1.8 million in- $125,000—requires the base to be broad- come earners below $10,000 not subject to ened. We are advocating strong structural tax income tax. The cost is estimated by the reform, but you can only do what is afford- Democrats—and we do not have the ability able, and what is affordable right now from to model this—to be between $5.39 billion our perspective is to increase the tax-free and $5.6 billion each year for the next three threshold. We consider that that would de- years. This is roughly the same as for the liver a better tax outcome to nearly everyone government’s tax proposal. In fact, this earning under $60,000, with respect to La- amendment is meant to reflect our alternative bor’s proposal, and everyone earning under proposal to that of the government. Our es- $65,000, with respect to the coalition’s pro- timate is that around 7.5 million Australians posal. The question of course is whether will be better off under the Democrats pro- there is support in the chamber for this ap- posal—and that is about half a million more proach. than I have heard the Labor Party say will be Senator SHERRY (Tasmania) (6.44 better off as a result of their proposal. pm)—I do want to make some specific Put simply, the Australian Democrats ac- comments about the Democrat amendments cept that tax cuts are warranted as a result of but I also want to touch on the themes or the there being a very substantial budget surplus. propositions that were put by Senator However, we believe very strongly that the Minchin in his concluding remarks, the prin- greatest tax burden is on low-income earners ciples in terms of the tax issues we are con- and they have the highest effective marginal sidering and some issues relating to the tax rates. We are also convinced that improv- Greens’ second reading amendment that was ing their tax situation will improve welfare- just defeated.

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 121

Firstly, on Senator Minchin: I must admit I might remind the government that this Senator McGauran was a hard act to follow package we are considering from the gov- but, unlike Senator McGauran, Senator ernment was not presented to the electorate Minchin kept his contribution mercifully at the last election. The government won the short. But I put that aside. Senator Minchin election. That is the reality of life. You move referred to us, the Labor Party, with words to on. But it does not mean that a Labor opposi- the effect that we had made a terrible mis- tion, because we lost the election, have to take, made a political judgment and rushed automatically vote in support of every gov- the decision to block the government’s tax ernment measure that is then presented to the cuts. That was the basic theme of one of his Senate after that election. sets of comments. The Labor Party decided Senator Murray—Might as well just do not to support the government’s tax package away with parliament. because it was immediately obvious to the Senator SHERRY—Or do away with the Labor Party that it was not a fair package and Senate. I have to say I do not remember this it was not balanced. It was not hard to make attitude—Senator Minchin was not here at a call in those circumstances. I outlined why the time—after the 1993 election when the in my speech in the second reading debate. I Labor budget of 1994 was presented. There will give a little bit more detail of Labor’s were some tax changes in that budget and the alternative package and alternative set of now government fought and opposed those propositions when we get to those amend- tax changes tooth and nail. The Labor Party ments. argued a lot of issues around the tax changes Senator Minchin made the point that the in the 1994 budget. We did not argue that the government had just been re-elected, it had Liberal Party should automatically sign up brought down a budget and it had a funda- because we had just been re-elected. I just mental right to do what it was proposing. make those observations about the issues With a little bit of reflection on history, I surrounding principles. should remind Senator Minchin that we were One central principle for the Labor Party in a very similar position—in principle, an is: is this tax package fundamentally fair identical position—after the 1998 election. both in the context of the budget and the 10 The Labor Party refused to support a GST years of this government? Labor—rightly, in and there was, frankly, a rush by the Democ- my view, and I believe this passionately— rats to engage and negotiate with the gov- came to the conclusion that it was not fair, ernment of the day on that GST package. we should not support it and we should offer Even though that package had been pre- a positive alternative. The bottom line is it is sented as part of the 1998 election, the Labor $6 a week for low- and middle-income Aus- Party decided that the GST was not a fair tax, tralians from this Liberal government. Labor and we stood on that principle, as we are have developed and costed an alternative doing here today. The Labor Party made a proposal that responsibly delivers double that decision that we would fight this issue. figure—$12 a week for low- and middle- Whether it is at a political cost or not, we income earners in this country. will see. We made a decision we would fight on principle and we would present a fairer I will make a couple of comments about and more balanced alternative, and that is the approach in principle of the Greens. They precisely what we are doing. moved an amendment on the second reading, which has been defeated. In summary: it op-

CHAMBER 122 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 posed any tax cut and argued that the money The finding of the Human Rights Com- should be allocated towards improving gov- missioner was quite unequivocal. The find- ernment services, health, education and the ing was that the rights of most of the people like. I would just like to draw the attention of who complained under the International the Senate to the Greens’ policy platform, Covenant on Civil and Political Rights had which specifically commits the Greens to: been breached. Another example of how far … significantly raise the tax-free threshold— out of whack everything in this area has gone Progress reported. is the fact that reports like this, in which the Human Rights Commissioner can find that DOCUMENTS the immigration department and the then The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT detention centre providers, ACM, have (Senator Cherry)—Order! It being 6.50 pm, breached people’s human rights, are tabled the Senate will proceed to the consideration here with no comment and with barely a of government documents. yawn. If I had not stood up to speak to it, it Human Rights and Equal Opportunity would have passed without any notice at all. Commission Our government breaches the Interna- Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) (6.50 tional Covenant on Civil and Political Rights pm)—I move: as determined under our own law through the That the Senate take note of the document. Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Com- mission, but nobody cares. It is par for the This is a report from the Human Rights and course for the government and the depart- Equal Opportunity Commission of an inquiry ment to ignore these findings, as they have in into complaints by immigration detainees the past. This is not the first time such a find- concerning their detention at the Curtin Im- ing has occurred. The specific aspect of these migration Reception and Processing Centre. complaints was that a range of people—26 This report is another example—one complainants—were put in separation deten- amongst the now countless number of exam- tion in Curtin detention centre for significant ples—of what the minister herself and the periods of time. According to DIMIA’s own department head of DIMIA have now ac- figures, the greatest of those periods was 264 knowledged is a major problem with the cul- days. Separation detention is when people ture of the immigration department. are put in a separate area when they first ar- This report shows that that problem goes rive in detention and can have no contact back a long way, because it deals with com- with anyone outside that area. They can have plaints made by a range of detainees—all of no contact with the outside world and no them asylum seekers—back in 2000-01. It contact with anybody else even within the has taken that long for this report to even be facility. They can have no contact with a tabled in the parliament. That is example No. lawyer or the Ombudsman unless specifi- 1 of why the current so-called checks and cally requested. Again, that is a clear exam- balances are inadequate. The department ple of the problem with the culture. They put often says, ‘If people have problems, they people away from everything else. They do can complain to the Human Rights Commis- not even let them know their rights, and it is sioner and the Ombudsman.’ These people only if detainees know the magic words to complained about their treatment back in specifically request a lawyer or specifically 2001, and here is the report four years later. know to request to talk to the Ombudsman,

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 123 for example, that they then can speak to journed till Thursday at general business, them—and only about that specific issue. Senator Bartlett in continuation. The commissioner, in looking at the Inter- ADJOURNMENT national Covenant on Civil and Political The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT Rights, looked at the relevant law and what (Senator Cherry)—Order! There being no is called the body of principles that has been further consideration of government docu- developed around that international law for ments, I propose the question: the protection of all persons under any form That the Senate do now adjourn. of detention. One example of the sort of Environment sophistry and distortion of culture that DIMIA had developed even four or five Senator LEES (South Australia) (6.59 years ago is the fact that they said those laws pm)—One of the nice things about the privi- did not apply because it is not penal or cor- lege of serving in Australia’s parliament for rectional detention; it is immigration deten- such a long time is seeing things that I have tion. The department’s answer was, ‘We been involved in mature and come to frui- don’t even need to comply with those basic tion. Tonight I would like to draw the Sen- minimum principles because it’s not correc- ate’s attention to the environment and to the tional detention; it is administrative deten- health of our environment. The way we live tion, so we can operate on worse principles with our environment, use it, abuse it and than the basic principles for correctional de- protect it is the single most important factor tention.’ That is bad enough, but the fact is in Australia’s national security and long-term that they were wrong anyway. It is quite prosperity. Our dependence on more and clearly stated that the body of principles is more intensive use of resources, more and meant to apply to all people under any form more land clearing, more and more plough- of detention. This report gives page after ing of marginal sandy soils and more and page of blatant breaches and blatant con- more greenhouse gas emissions cannot con- tempt for any due process and for the basic tinue. Already we are realising there is a humanity of people. This was four or five problem with water use in the Murray- years ago. The same is happening today. If Darling Basin, but this is just one of the anything, it is possibly worse because they problems that must be addressed as a matter have been allowed to get away with it for all of urgency. This is not scaremongering; it is that length of time and, not surprisingly, they a simple assessment drawn from history and have therefore become more and more blase from looking at the steadily worsening envi- about that sort of treatment of human beings. ronmental indicators and the steadily increas- I seek leave to continue my remarks later. ing clean-up costs. Leave granted. I have committed a lot of time to envi- ronment issues during my period as a senator Consideration because I believe they are so fundamentally The following document was considered: important. While I have certainly added my Human Rights and Equal Opportunity voice to protect various species and various Commission—Report—No. 28—Inquiry places, I have also pinpointed the processes into complaints by immigration detainees that are causing such detrimental change. I concerning their detention at the Curtin believe you need four things to happen if you Immigration Reception and Processing Centre. Motion to take note of document are to consider your time in this chamber moved by Senator Bartlett. Debate ad- worth while. Firstly, you need to be able to

CHAMBER 124 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 point to—to shine light on—specific issues worshipped as long as this person does not for your constituents, issues that you care compromise. about. Secondly, you need to make responsi- Their warnings about the environment are ble policy and legislative change. Thirdly, often fairly accurate but their methods of you need to make changes to funding, both achieving change are highly questionable. to add investment or dollars to your area of You see, making the rest of us out to be concern and to take money, subsidies or in- planet destroyers and never compromising centives away from destructive practices or leads to really achieving nothing. In fact, you in some cases put in penalties if all else fails. get 100 per cent of nothing. It is indulgent Fourthly, you need to bring others with you, behaviour, and it is behaviour that is failing through compromise, through gradually us because little is achieved on the ground moving the majority in the direction that other than getting other people’s backs up. makes a difference and that makes Australia So things actually continue to get worse. a better place. Let me take these in turn, par- Sure, they may be able to point at the odd ticularly as they relate to the environment. piece of wilderness they have saved. As a Shining a light is easy. There are many matter of fact, I can point out a few that I opportunities built into the Senate structure have contributed to protecting—most re- for standing up and talking about the things cently, the Brooklyn station in Queensland. that really matter to you and speaking on But, as I said, the route of words alone is a behalf of your constituents. I imagine that no-brainer route. will be more difficult in the new Senate. But I will consider the second and third ways shining a light or highlighting an issue is to make one’s time in the Senate worth while only the first step. Extracts from speeches together. Making policy and legislative may make great fill in senators’ newsletters, change and getting funding shifted from de- but words do not in the end save a single structive practices to positive practices is tree. In fact, I would describe them on their difficult. It often wins you very few friends, own as just no-brainers. particularly in the short term; it is hard work; Some take an ecocentric view of the and it is long hours spent poring through the world. They think only of the environment. detail. It is many meetings and long argu- When they think of the environment they ments. It is proving your point with research. say: ‘All species are victims; all humans are It is consulting up-to-date experts and it is destroyers.’ Anyone who wants to protect the use of persuasion. It is being accommo- species is innocent; anyone who they see as dating when other arguments are put to you threatening them is a destroyer. It is a very that you consider fair and reasonable. It in- simple world to live in. There are a number volves relentless pressure from others, par- of individuals and some environment lobby ticularly from those lobby groups and often groups who operate to this formula. These from the media. It involves carefully check- ecocentrics never compromise. The other ing arguments before either accepting or side is always wrong and, more than that, the dismissing them. It involves having a pur- other side is always evil. For the ecocentrics, pose and a commitment to achieving real the sky is always falling down. Catastrophe change and wearing the flak. is just around the corner. Disaster is looming. In the late 1990s I decided to negotiate se- They always want environmental nirvana, riously with the current government on the and they want utopia and nirvana now. They complete rewrite of most of Australia’s fed- have the odd titular political head, who is

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 125 eral environment laws. With a number of against the bill. In doing so, they locked environment groups against it and with pres- themselves into an uncompromising position sure on me to say no under any circum- of saying no to good policy reform. They stances, this was difficult. However, I could were led all the way by Senator Brown from not ignore the fact that it was processes in the Greens, the champion no-compromiser. the existing laws that were leading to Frank- Many good people, sadly, fell victim to lin dams, the destruction of the Great Barrier ideology and did not see the realistic and Reef, the killing of species and the destruc- good public policy outcomes that were tion of habitat, and development being done achieved. Fortunately, groups like the without any consideration for the environ- Queensland Conservation Council, the Hu- mental impact. As well, state and federal mane Society International, the Tasmanian governments were running rampant with Conservation Trust and WWF were focused ever-decreasing environmental protection on fixing the law, and we worked diligently laws. together to do just that and make the new No, I did not get everything I wanted in legislation. But it came at a price. Consider- the Environmental Protection and Biodiver- able invective was thrown at us, privately sity Conservation Act, but neither did the and publicly, by the likes of Senator Brown, government. I got most of what I wanted. the ACF, Greenpeace and the Wilderness The legislation passed in 1999. The result is Society. They tried some quite nasty things the world’s first comprehensive biodiversity behind the scenes, including pressure to get legislation that carries jail terms as well as one of the supportive conservationists monetary penalties—legislation that pro- sacked. Publicly, they berated us in inter- tected world heritage and wetlands properly, views and in press releases and set in place a that protected endangered species very thor- grudge they wore on their sleeves for a num- oughly, that drew the states into line and that ber of years. meant the federal environment minister, not It is now six years, almost to the day, the resources minister, made environment since those negotiations and I want to decisions. It is a piece of legislation with quickly bring the Senate up to date by ad- extensive third-party powers for legal action dressing the fourth way I listed to make our to protect the environment. That was a first time in the Senate worth while, and that is to in Australia. bring others with you—moving the majority Strangely, the ACF, the Wilderness Soci- in a direction that does make a difference in ety, Greenpeace and Senator Brown rejected the longer term. We now have an extensive the legislation without reading the outcomes web site for the EPBC Act, which shows of all the negotiations, without reading the every step of the way as an environment de- clauses or understanding how they would cision travels through the processes. That work. They started screaming injustice helps both conservationists and individuals straightaway. Their press comments on in the local community. I have been in- nearly 600 meticulous amendments repre- formed that this is a model of public trans- senting sweeping and fundamental changes parency and decision making that is world to the draft came very quickly after they recognised. We have extensive environ- were published. They persuaded a gullible mental administration and governance com- ALP, who were desperate to look different ing from a stronger federal environment de- from this government on something— partment. We have nearly all state and terri- anything—to go with them and to vote tory governments amending their legislation

CHAMBER 126 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 to bring it up to the federal standard. We simply untrue. It is untrue for Australia, and have developers who work with the federal doubly so for my home state of Tasmania. environment department from the beginning This is because many Tasmanians rely on of their projects to make sure they put in the Australian Industrial Relations Commis- enough protection to make a permit possible. sion to provide them with a decent living Indeed, there is even one running seminars wage. Sadly, for up to 100,000 Tasmanians, on how to do it. last week’s decision by the Australian Indus- There are many stories of proponents now trial Relations Commission to grant an extra talking environment from the word go rather $17 per week to low-paid workers will be the than ignoring it all the way through. We have last piece of good news they will receive. had considerable positive feedback from The award increase of $17 per week lifts the utilities, corporations and, yes, conservation- minimum weekly wage to $484.40 and will ists and local communities on the function- help keep the wages of low-paid Tasmanian ing of the act. There have been injunctions to workers ahead of projected inflation. But if protect species, force the environment minis- the Prime Minister had had his way last ter to take more action and, in a full Federal week, up to 100,000 Tasmanian workers Court decision, even put downstream and would have received $6 a week less—that is cumulative effects into the environment min- $312 less over the coming year. The amount ister’s area of consideration. of $312 is not much for members of the I have one more thing to note. Six years Howard government. In fact, it is not much on, Greenpeace have investigated using the more than five weeks worth of tax cuts that act in a legal case. The ACF underwrote the they have decided to award themselves. But Nathan Dam case, which was the most fa- it is a hell of a lot for Tasmanian workers on vourable win for conservationists in a dec- the minimum wage. ade. The Wilderness Society has used the act, In the current national wage case, the and now even Senator Bob Brown is heading Prime Minister supported an increase in the into the court brandishing it, with his usual minimum wage of just 2.35 per cent, or an moral outrage fuelling his feet. May you use extra 29c per hour. That is less than the rate the act often and wisely and well, Senator of inflation and would have resulted in a Brown. And may you one day have the cour- continuing real wage reduction for up to age to admit that you were wrong—you 100,000 Tasmanians. Since coming into should not have opposed it absolutely; you power in 1996, the Howard government has should have worked with us to help improve opposed every minimum wage case out- it. come. Since 1996, if the Prime Minister— Tasmania: Industrial Relations the alleged workers’ best friend—had had his way, many Tasmanian workers and their Senator O’BRIEN (Tasmania) (7.09 families would today be $50 per week, or pm)—I rise to speak about this government’s $2,600 per year, worse off. The Howard gov- betrayal of the people of Tasmania, particu- ernment’s ongoing support for a reduction in larly in the area of industrial relations. The real wages is a worrying sign for the lowest Prime Minister continues to make the Orwel- paid workers in Tasmania. Under its indus- lian claim that his government is the best trial relations plan, the independent Austra- friend of the Australian worker. Yet we lian Industrial Relations Commission, which know, and those opposite know, that this is has delivered fair and sustainable wage in- creases for low-paid workers for 98 years,

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 127 will be replaced by a hand-picked low-pay staff. That puts paid to the Prime Minister’s commission. The low-pay commission is claims that unfair dismissal laws have held likely to be little more than a rubber stamp, back jobs growth in Australia. Instead, it is allowing the Howard government to cut the the Howard government which has held back real wages of low-paid Tasmanians as it has small business and jobs growth by creating sought to do in national wage cases during red tape and neglecting to invest in the skills the entirety of its life in government. and infrastructure Australia so desperately The Prime Minister, the Treasurer and the needs. Minister for Employment and Workplace It was the Howard government which Relations have refused to guarantee that in- crippled small business with the red tape of dividual Australian workers and their fami- the business activity statement. And it is the lies will not be worse off under their pro- Howard government which, from July this posed industrial relations changes. In the year, will increase the red tape burden on wake of this latest Australian Industrial Rela- small business when the choice of superan- tions Commission wage case, and the refusal nuation legislation takes effect. The coalition of the government to guarantee that workers claims to be the best friend small business will not be worse off, Senators Abetz, Bar- ever had, yet it lumps its small business best nett, Colbeck, Watson and Calvert must ex- friends with hours of extra paperwork under plain to the people of Tasmania why their choice of super legislation, and threatens to government thinks low-paid Tasmanians de- fine or even imprison small business opera- serve to have their real wages cut. The Prime tors who make an honest mistake in contra- Minister has defended his industrial relations vention of the complex compliance proce- package—his latest attack on a fair go for dures under the new super choice regime. Australian workers—on the basis that it will If Mr Howard wanted to assist Tasmanian create new jobs. A key component of the businesses, surely he would take the axe to package is, of course, regressive changes to the red tape his government is creating in- the unfair dismissal laws. The link between stead of taking the axe to the wages and con- job creation and making it lawful to sack ditions of Tasmanian workers. The Tasma- people unfairly has not been explained by the nian people know they should take cover Howard government, its acolytes in the me- whenever members of this government start dia and, of course, those right-wing think talking about being their best friend. Before tanks that seem to always support it. The the last election the Minister for Health and government has a responsibility to make the Ageing, Mr Abbott, said the Howard gov- case and so far it has failed miserably to do ernment was the best friend Medicare has so. ever had. Unbelievably, he is still saying it. The shallowness of the government’s po- But, as we all know, within months of the sition is exposed by the results of the latest poll—in a backflip that, even by the low survey of national business expectations by standards of the Howard government, is one Dun and Bradstreet. The survey reveals that, of the most disgraceful in Australian political when questioned specifically about the im- history—it had trashed the Medicare safety pact of the unfair dismissal component of the net. That backflip has made government MPs Howard government’s industrial relations like Michael Ferguson and Mark Baker look reforms, more than 80 per cent of businesses pretty silly, given how they campaigned on said they expected they would have little or the Medicare safety net prior to the last elec- no impact on their intention to employ new tion. But, worse, that feat of acrobatics will

CHAMBER 128 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 cost Tasmanian families and workers hun- posed on the states by the Commonwealth. It dreds extra each year in health costs. intends to do this by utilising a section of the The Howard government claims it is the Constitution—the corporations power— best friend that families have ever had, but which is not intended for industrial relations. the interest rate rise of March this year—and The Australian Constitution has a particu- those still to come—can be attributed to its lar section in it that deals with industrial dis- neglect of investment in skills and infrastruc- putes going beyond the borders of one state ture, Australia’s blossoming debt balloon and and it is from that section that our constitu- the government’s preparedness to blow $66 tional forebears, when they inserted it, knew billion in taxpayers’ funds to get itself re- a national system of industrial relations elected. The Tasmanian people are right to would grow up. Governments over the last worry when the Howard government de- century have used that section to legislate. clares itself to be their best friend, because This government intends to use a different with friends like the Howard government, section, never intended by our constitutional frankly, who needs enemies? forebears to legislate on industrial relations, Australian Constitution to impose a system over the states. If this view had been apparent at the time of the Senator COOK (Western Australia) (7.17 constitutional conventions in the 19th cen- pm)—In three weeks time, after 22 years in tury leading into the establishment of the this place, I will leave the Senate and end my federation of Australia, Australia would not formal political career. But tonight I do not exist as a national entity now. It would have want to make a valedictory speech—that will been seen as a power grab by a central gov- come next week. Tonight, I want to talk on ernment over the authority of the then colo- what is more in the form of a last word on a nies and now states. It would have been serious issue. That serious issue is the creep- enough to kill the referendum and the sup- ing attempt by the federal government to port for a one-country Australia. remake the Constitution of Australia—and to remake it by the use of executive power and As well, this government intends—and is the power of incumbency. part way down the track of doing this—to take over some of the training and skills Let me explain. Since the election of the training responsibilities of the states by du- Howard government, it has been made clear plicating some of the work that state gov- that it intends to intrude on the rights of ernments already do. This government has states in several ways. There is a pattern to flagged that it intends to exert a bigger role what is emerging. It is emerging from the over the states on health issues. The Deputy same cabinet and therefore one must assume Prime Minister, John Anderson, has it is working to the same theme by that cabi- blithely—and, if reports are to be believed, net. This government intends to enact legis- without the approval or consultation of his lation—and we will deal with those bills in cabinet colleagues—announced that he in- this sitting fortnight, so I will not go into tends the Commonwealth to take control them in any detail now—to impose a new over the infrastructure supply chain for industrial relation system in a cavalier way goods and services to our ports. The Treas- that overrides the established industrial rela- urer has started to try to monster the states by tions systems of the states. This is not some- blackmailing them with the income stream thing negotiated between the Commonwealth derived from the GST over what mix of state and the states; this is something to be im- taxes should be imposed in state budgets.

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 129

One could go on. These forays into state ju- efficient delivery of services that they know risdictions go well beyond the traditional Labor believes in and can deliver at their methods of tied grants or, as we have seen local level. In terms of political theory, it since this government came to power, may mean that in these days of terrorism blackmailing universities or construction they are more comfortable at federal level companies on which laws should apply in the with a government that they perceive—in my industrial relations system. submission, wrongly, but nonetheless—as Put together, this is a full-throated power being of a more militaristic bent than Labor grab which remakes the constitutional struc- has an image for. Whatever the case, the fact ture of the federation—and it is nothing short that the federal government has been elected of that. This is an attempt at revolution of the does not give it an authority to undermine Australian Constitution using the powers of the power of the states. incumbency, using the taxing power which I am surprised that in this chamber little or provides the financial succour that the states nothing has been said about the manoeuvres need to support their services and using other by the federal government to intrude upon mechanisms to force federal authority over state authority. I will defend the rights of the states. If Gough Whitlam had the reputa- states where it is constitutionally appropriate, tion—and there was a perception of this— because this power grab by the Common- that he was an ardent centralist, then this wealth has not been preceded by a referen- goes well beyond any Whitlamesque dream dum. It has not been preceded by proper fed- of central authority in Australia and takes eral-state negotiations inviting the ceding of controls off the states. powers by the states, which is the other way It is appropriate that these remarks be of changing the federal Constitution. And it made in this chamber. The Senate is, after would be thrown out of court, if it ever went all, a states house. It is appropriate that these to the High Court, because it is such a radical remarks be made in this chamber and that revolution in the meaning of this Constitu- senators representing the states in this cham- tion that, even in the wildest of fancies, at ber stand up and defend the rights of their federal level no judges sitting true and good states. In doing so, I need to make one thing in the High Court could interpret the actions clear: I am not an absolute states rightist, of this government as conforming with any- come rain, hail or snow. I believe states have thing that is a semblance of the Constitution. rights and I believe the Commonwealth has So it is appropriate that this chamber direct rights. It would be a good thing if we could its attention to a government that is out of find a more effective mechanism than we control constitutionally and is trying to strip have in the hundred years since Federation to the states of authoritative power. work out those differences more coopera- Later in this sitting fortnight I intend to tively, but we have not. speak specifically about the role that the What is true on the political landscape of Treasurer has taken unto himself in demand- Australia is that, at state level, voters prefer ing tax changes of state governments at state Labor. What is also unfortunately true, from level. He has—in my view, fraudulently— my perspective, is that at federal level, over put forward his argument based on under- the last couple of elections, voters have pre- standings achieved at the time the GST was ferred a conservative government. On that enacted. It is true, and I will say this now, analysis, it means that voters want to see the that when the GST was mooted there was an understanding between the Commonwealth

CHAMBER 130 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 and the states about which state taxes would defending the rights of Western Australians. be collapsed in favour of a revenue stream He wants to obtain and maintain the right to from the GST, but this chamber knows better legislate in this important area at a state than any other chamber in this Common- level. (Time expired) wealth that the GST legislation was Zonta Club amended, and it was amended here. It was Senator STOTT DESPOJA (South Aus- amended to take food out of the GST, which tralia) (7.28 pm)—I begin by acknowledging junked all of the previous arrangements that Senator Cook’s speech. If I do not get an applied and invited and obtained a new set of opportunity to wish him well in post-Senate arrangements which altered the commitment life, I do so now: you are in fine form. I look of the states to remove certain taxes. For the forward to future speeches, certainly in the Treasurer now to pretend that the first deal is next couple of weeks. But tonight I wish to still intact is of course laughable. When I talk about a project in my home state of speak later on this in more detail I will go to South Australia that is having a significant the instruments of federal-state understand- impact on women in developing countries ing which establish that point. around the world. It is the birthing kit project Senator Ian Macdonald—It’s pretty conducted by the Zonta Club of the Adelaide popular though. It’s pretty popular with the Hills. As I am sure honourable senators public. would be aware, Zonta is an international Senator COOK—I take the interjection service organisation of women executives in from the minister, because he is a minister business and the professions working to- sworn to uphold the Constitution—that is gether to advance the status of women gen- what you do when you are sworn in as a erally. I recently had the privilege of being senator in this place, and that is what you do guest speaker at their annual general meeting when you are sworn into the office of execu- and dinner in Adelaide. tive authority that comes with being a minis- The United Nations World Health Organi- ter. There are things that are passing fancies sation estimated in 1996 that 585,000 women in terms of popular politics which may not died annually in childbirth. Developing be constitutional, but ministers and govern- countries accounted for 99 per cent of these ments—and this federal government—have deaths. For every woman who dies in child- an obligation to uphold the Constitution, not birth, a further 30 women incur injuries and subvert it, in my view, and I think that is the infections, many of which are disabling, view of any reasonable Australian. painful, embarrassing and lifelong. There are In my own state of Western Australia ways that are recommended to overcome or some of these changes have been greeted by reduce these statistics. They include (1) pre- the conservative opposition in that state with venting unwanted pregnancies, (2) improv- a big thumbs down. Industrial relations is ing antenatal care, (3) improving capacity for one of them. The new state leader in Western dealing with obstetric complications and (4), Australia, Matt Birney, has made it clear—to pretty simple, providing clean birthing con- the embarrassment of the federal industrial ditions. This is where the Zonta Club of the relations minister, Kevin Andrews, standing Adelaide Hills comes in. on the same platform—that he does not sup- In 1995, Dr Joy O’Hazy, a member of the port the power grab from the Common- Zonta Club of the Adelaide Hills, attended wealth. And full marks to Matt Birney for the Fourth World Conference for Women in

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 131

Beijing. There she heard Sally Field, the ac- five gauze squares, three cord ties and a ster- tor, talk about the success of simple birthing ile scalpel blade—all contained in a press- kits that were being used in Nepal. This led seal plastic bag. It costs 70c to produce one to Dr O’Hazy researching the basic resource of these kits. requirements for a birthing kit, in consulta- Sixty million women give birth each year, tion with Professor Anthony Radford, an with the assistance of a traditional birth at- international health consultant. In 1999, un- tendant or with no assistance at all. These der the supervision of an experienced com- women need a birthing kit. The Zonta Club munity development worker, the first 100 of the Adelaide Hills Birthing Kit Project did birthing kits were sent to Ferguson Island, not stop at PNG. In addition to the 13,000 Papua New Guinea, to be trialled by the vil- kits that were distributed in PNG, Zonta has lage birth attendants in rural villages. distributed more than 11,000 kits to 12 coun- According to the PNG health department, tries. This amazing group of women have in rural PNG there was a one in seven mor- established the program with other NGOs tality rate in childbirth from infection. and organisations in 22 countries, including Hence, a clean birth would have the potential Timor-Leste, Vietnam, Fiji, Ethiopia, Myan- to make an enormous difference to the health mar and Afghanistan. They have never lost a of both the mother and the child. After re- consignment in five years. They research all ceiving positive feedback from the commu- aspects of transport for the most reliable and nity worker, the birthing kits became an inte- cheapest way to move the kits around the gral part of the training of village birth atten- world. There is no compromise when it dants under the AusAID-sponsored Women’s comes to quality and accountability. The and Children’s Health Project. In 2000, the birthing kits are sent only to places where project became nationally accepted and sup- they have been requested. They are always ported 12 provinces within PNG. To date, distributed through health professionals in more than 13,000 kits have been provided to hospitals or health clinics—frequently where PNG. there are training programs for birth atten- Birthing kits provide for a clean birth, dants. The health professional undertakes which may decrease the risk of death from responsibility for training people in how to infection and bleeding. A birthing kit works use the kits and how to dispose of waste. by providing the seven ‘cleans’ for a clean The Adelaide Hills birthing kit project has birth: a clean birth site, preventing delivery been so successful and worthy that it has onto the floor; clean hands, to prevent the now become a Zonta national project. By the birth attendant transmitting germs to mother end of 2006, more than 550,000 Zonta birth- and baby; clean ties, to prevent bleeding ing kits will have been requested from 22 from the umbilical cord for mother and baby; developing countries. Through a partnership a clean razor, to reduce infection caused by with the National Foundation for Australian other implements; clean gauze to wipe away Women, they have achieved tax deductibility birth canal secretions from the eyes, which status for donations to the project. I ac- reduces eye infections; a clean umbilical knowledge the support of Minister for For- cord, because washing and drying the stumps eign Affairs, Mr Downer, in approving an prevents infection; and a clean perineum. AusAID grant to the project last year of The kit consists of a number of things, in- $113,000 on a dollar for dollar basis, and I cluding a square metre plastic sheet for the do remind him that the club is anticipating a mother to lie on, a piece of soap, two gloves, further grant in July 2005.

CHAMBER 132 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

The Zonta club have some impressive today—and honoured in that memory—by plans for the future: they will now encourage the civic government of the city, the resi- the local women to assemble their own birth- dents of Mackay, and their immediate fami- ing kits, as has occurred in Milne Bay, Papua lies and descendants in America. New Guinea; they want to expand the pro- The Australian-American connection is ject, using the successful model in Australia, very deep, and the Bakers Creek Memorial to other Zonta countries worldwide; they signifies that relationship in a very special want to make this a worldwide Zonta Inter- way. The memorial is also unique in that it national Service Project; they want to create marks a civil accident in a time of war and it a birthing kit foundation; and they seek to exists on two continents. This year’s Wash- conduct an epidemiological study of the im- ington commemoration is due to start in a pact of the birthing kits. few hours. Our links with America, and Assembly days for the kits are real com- America’s with us, are soundly based on munity affairs, with participation from Zonta shared values: democracy, the rule of law, members, students of local schools, family heritage, decency, the determination to face members, friends and volunteers. At the down evil and the commitment to stand up 2004 assembly day, 60 volunteers assembled for what is right. It is firmly based on com- 2,000 birthing kits in three hours. I am in- monsense and mutual interest. formed that, on Saturday, 7 May 2005, they In Mackay on Saturday night we gathered broke that record and assembled 2,400 kits. I as friends, from both sides of the Pacific commend the work of the project manag- Ocean, for fellowship, to renew acquaint- ers—Dr Julie Monis-Ivett and Dr Joy ance, to make new friends and to celebrate O’Hazy—the women of the Adelaide Hills the lives of the Bakers Creek heroes. They branch of Zonta, and the wider Zonta Inter- were heroes, not victims, and we must never national organisation for their dedication to forget it. They died in a foreign land while this project, which is among many for which engaged in a deadly fight against a deter- they are responsible when it comes to ad- mined enemy in conditions of total war. In vancing the status of women across the wartime secrets must be kept and at times world. I think women and families in devel- information must be withheld from family oping countries are certainly better off for it. and kin. But when the conflict is over and Air Crash Anniversary the operational reasons for secrecy no longer Water Smart Australia exist, important information must be re- vealed. The tremendous work of the two Senator SANTORO (Queensland) (7.36 Bakers Creek associations—here in Australia pm)—At the weekend, I had the honour and and across our shared ocean in America— the privilege of attending and taking part in has kept the flame alive. It has helped some the annual tribute to the American dead of of our American friends finally understand Bakers Creek and Mackay. These 40 Ameri- what happened to their loved one who went cans died in 1943 in what remains Australia’s away to war and did not return. That is a worst air crash. Today is the 62nd anniver- public service of the highest degree. sary of that crash. Before these American servicemen died so far away from their There are two catalysts for the Bakers homes and their loved ones, they had be- Creek Memorial: the historian of the Mackay come part of Mackay’s extended family of RSL, Col Benson, and American professor the wartime years. They are remembered Bob Cutler in Washington, DC. They are

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 133 themselves heroes—heroes to history, for were not where they were by misadventure; ensuring that a story from the past does not they were there because their country told die. They are certainly heroes to the families them to be there. That is why we must al- of the Bakers Creek dead for pursuing the ways honour them. We know that six dec- dream of a proper memorial. To reveal the ades ago the people of Mackay took these truth, to help bring closure after some des- men to their hearts. We know they made perately sad event, even six decades later, is them feel as much at home as possible in the an act of kindness. So often these things circumstances of war and so far away from come down to the energy and commitment of their real homes and loved ones. And the individuals, people who just will not let go. people of Mackay, both individually and Great endeavours, like great causes, need through their civic government, continue catalysts. Col and Bob are very good cata- doing that today. Bakers Creek is part of lysts indeed. their history too. Mackay of course is a very The memorial dinner on Saturday night special place inhabited by special people: was a convivial occasion, presided over with people such as Ed Casey, the veteran former skill by the master of ceremonies for the oc- state member for the area, who played an casion, Mr John Pickup. One of Australia’s initial—and absolutely vital, I add—role in two Vietnam War Victoria Cross winners, the project to make a permanent memorial. Keith Payne, was also at the dinner and read I became interested in the project and the the Ode to the Fallen. Warrant Officer Payne history behind it when in 2003 I had the is as feisty in retirement as he ever was in the honour of meeting the American party here Army, by the way. I believe our American in Australia for the 60th anniversary. I told guests—Brigadier-General Bradley Baker, the Senate about it in an adjournment speech Vice Commander, 5th Air Force, who was at the time. On that occasion the Bakers here from Japan for the anniversary; Jack Creek pilgrims were led by Alvin—Mo—and and Ginger Ogren from New Hampshire; and Vera Berg, from Texas. I believe they en- Frank Smith III and his wife Dot with Frank joyed the Brisbane hospitality that was af- Smith IV and sister Kelly Sellers—enjoyed forded to them. There is also today signifi- themselves. cant interest in the Bakers Creek story in the The commemoration on Sunday was a American legislature. For today’s Washing- solemn occasion, as was proper. Visiting the ton ceremony at the new World War II me- site of the crash was a most moving experi- morial there, Senator Rick Santorum of ence for both the American visitors and the Pennsylvania has contributed a message, and accompanying party. The emotion was pal- there is legislation in congress to provide for pable in the relatives of two of the American a memorial marker, perhaps at Arlington. servicemen who perished on that fateful day The Americans who died at Bakers Creek in 1943. The site is surrounded by very 62 years ago were in our country on fur- healthy mangroves. The site itself, which lough, what we would nowadays call R&R. was mangroves at the time, remains bereft of They were resting from the conflict then rag- trees today. ing in the south-west Pacific. Tragedy gave The Bakers Creek air crash is one of an them a permanent home in our country. For innumerable compendium of human disas- all time, these men are part of our story too. ters from World War II. Each man who died Today again we stand with the Americans in in that crash was a casualty of war. They defence of freedom. We are companions, again, on a dangerous journey through a

CHAMBER 134 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 world that is threatened by new and deadly supply and our vulnerability. Our cities, agri- challenges. That single fact—the fact that we cultural industries and aspects of our envi- must again work together to confront evil ronment are all subject to prolonged dry and to protect ourselves and our communi- conditions and are all vulnerable to them. We ties and our way of life—gives extra reason know too that many water catchments and to remember the sacrifice of those who went aquifers are under stress, and some are before. Times change and the benefits of reaching the limits of their sustainable capac- hard won freedom, both social and eco- ity. In these circumstances Australia must nomic, have immeasurably altered how all of make use of the many opportunities that exist us live. Former enemies are now friends. We to better use the supplies of water already move on, but we do not forget. Every nation developed. We must make use too of human is entitled to its remembrance and to honour ingenuity to employ new technology and its dead. infrastructure, and to develop new and sus- I want to continue my remarks by speak- tainable sources of supply. Australian clean ing about the Water Smart Australia program, water technology is world renowned, and a great initiative of the forward-thinking rightly so. Only this month I was in China, Howard government. I also want to canvass where the great work that Hervey Bay City some of the details of a very practical initia- Council and Wide Bay Water are doing in the tive that has come forward for funding con- city of Leshan is an effective reminder of sideration from the great Queensland city of this. Toowoomba. As so many Australians know It was with Australian ingenuity in mind to their own direct cost, many areas of our that in June last year the federal government country are subject to highly variable rainfall and most state governments agreed to im- patterns. Consistency is not nature’s way. plement the National Water Initiative. It was Water crises happen quickly in Australia. As signed in recognition of the national impera- a community we have to react quickly too. tive to increase the productivity and effi- For example, from July sprinklers are to be ciency of Australia’s use of water in servic- banned in Brisbane, a sensible response to ing population centres and sustaining health- water shortage but an imperative to suburban ful river and ground water systems. Under gardeners to find better ways of creating and this agreement the $2 billion Australian gov- sustaining cool green gardens. ernment water fund came into being to pro- The recent good rains in the south-east of vide investment funding for selected water Australia have brought some relief to farm- projects. These projects need to be practical ers and agricultural communities in South on-ground water projects that improve na- Australia and Victoria and in parts of New tional water efficiency. They need to create South Wales. But the rain has not reached opportunities for industries, private invest- northern NSW, which is desperately parched, ment and employment—and at the same time or those many areas of Queensland that are protect, and where necessary restore, the en- afflicted by long-term drought. In any case, vironment. good follow-up rain is still needed. Water is This is not an impossible task, merely a life: there was never a truer statement made. very hard one that will require a lot of effort. As we also know, the drought of 2002— Australians are good at meeting challenges. which for some Australian farmers has be- The key word is ‘practical’. It almost always come the drought of 2002-05—revealed is, and this is where some of the deeper again the inconsistent nature of the water green elements of the environmental lobby

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 135 and their political representatives get a little cil, matched by $19.5 million from the off beam. A practical objective is to develop Queensland government, the proposed an agricultural and industrial sector that AGWF grant of $18.3 million and private leads the world in the careful and efficient investment of $7 million. use of water, and to bring about sustainable Mayor Thorley and the Toowoomba City household and garden water consumption. It Council’s Chief Executive Officer, Mr Chris is to provide greater preservation of Austra- Rose, came to see me recently to update me lia’s rivers and wetlands, which are unique, on the proposal. One interesting aspect of the and to promote our water technology. These proposal is that its cost is less than that of are among the practical objectives of the Na- building a new dam to create Toowoomba’s tional Water Initiative for 2015, just a decade fourth source of water. Toowoomba is an away. We obviously need to work towards exciting and vibrant city. It would be, of achieving these objectives on a cooperative, course; it is in Queensland—and I am sure community, national—and nationwide— Senator Moore opposite would agree with basis. me— In Queensland, three projects—at the Senator Ian Macdonald—I agree. Gold Coast, in Mackay where I was at the Senator Moore—I agree with you. weekend and in Bundaberg—have already been approved for federal investment total- Senator SANTORO—I think there is ling $32.2 million under the Water Smart unanimous agreement in the chamber that Australia component of the $2 billion Aus- Toowoomba is indeed one of the great vi- tralian water fund. The Gold Coast project is brant and exciting cities of Queensland. particularly interesting to me, given that the Senator McGauran—Always! Gold Coast is Queensland’s second largest Senator SANTORO—Always. But it is city and a place where water is always an also a city with some specific and indeed issue. It is getting $3.15 million over four unique requirements as well as attributes. years towards an investment of $9.45 million One of its benefits is its altitude. At 700 me- to reduce water leakage and stress on current tres it enjoys a temperate climate and, as I water supplies and provide more water to the have said in the Senate before, the city rivals city through cutting waste. Canberra in the colourful splendour of its Applications for funding under the first exotic deciduous trees. But this is also a round of the National Water Initiative close debit. It is a debit because its water has to be on 30 June. One application that is coming lifted almost 500 metres from its source forward in the first round is for $18.3 million dams. This costs $1.5 million a year and de- from the Australian government water fund livers water at 60c a kilolitre from to assist with the $64 million Water Futures Toowoomba’s taps. The city has the second Toowoomba project. Toowoomba City highest water delivery costs in Australia after Council, a highly progressive civic govern- Kalgoorlie in WA, a fact that I am sure is ment very ably led by Mayor Dianne Thor- appreciated by Senators Eggleston and ley, believes its project can demonstrate to Lightfoot, who are present in the chamber Australia the science of indirect potable re- tonight. use of water as a safe and sustainable com- Toowoomba has 94,000 people within its ponent of future water supply. The $64 mil- city boundaries. It is Queensland’s largest lion project costs would be made up of inland provincial city and also Australia’s $19.35 million from Toowoomba City Coun-

CHAMBER 136 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 largest regional inland city and serves a water resources in Australia. It would help wider population base of 300,000. Signifi- Australian communities deal with a future in cant drought over the past 10 years and con- which precious water is likely to be even sistent population growth, along with in- more finite than ever. The Water Smart pro- creasing demand, have made water supply gram is practical policy development and the most significant issue for Toowoomba implementation at its grassroots best and it and the surrounding area. It is clear that the deserves applause for this. growth demands of the Brisbane coastal Adjournment conurbation have ended any expectation that Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queen- Toowoomba could source additional water sland—Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and from the giant Wivenhoe Dam in the Bris- Conservation) (7.51 pm)—If nobody else bane Valley. The urgency in finding reliable wants to speak in this adjournment debate, and sustainable irrigation water also sparked can I conclude it by commenting on a very the proposal to pipe Brisbane’s grey water to fine speech from Senator Santoro and a very the Lockyer Valley, incidentally. Of course, fine speech from Senator Lees earlier on in as the city’s civic government recognises, the debate. I have not always agreed with there is no one ideal water solution anywhere Senator Lees and what the Democrats do, in Australia, the world’s driest continent. But going back to the days when Senator Lees responsible water management strategies ably led the Democrats—when they were will include multisource water supplies, actually achieving goals—but I do agree maximising water resources, effective de- with the point she makes: it is very important mand management strategies and a continu- that all people work together to get good out- ing—and, I would hope, over time signifi- comes. Senator Lees very carefully, clearly cantly enhanced—community involvement. and explicitly pointed out some of the hypoc- Toowoomba City Council recently ap- risy and fraudulent approaches of the Greens proved expenditure of $35 million to up- party and some of their issues. They have a grade its waste water treatment plant to lift fixed position, which is simply to oppose the its outfall standard to class A water. This will government regardless of the issue. not only provide a much improved outfall I thought Senator Lees, better than most, quality into the Murray-Darling catchment would be well aware of those issues, and her but also create a potential drinking water criticism—that is my description; I do not resource. The city council is pursuing oppor- think she would agree with that—and com- tunities for this resource, including its use by ments concerning the inflexible and politi- coal and energy producers and of course cally driven attitude of Senator Brown, the horticulturalists. Further refinement of this Wilderness Society and the ACF are worthy class A water would enable its urban direct of note. I am delighted to have been in the non-potable reuse in an adjoining shire and, chamber to hear Senator Lees’s speech. It is subject to Queensland Health approval, of some regret to me that we will not be able eventual indirect potable reuse—that is, as to benefit from that sort of advice and ap- drinking water—within Toowoomba. proach in the future. This is a strong and practical proposal Senator O’Brien gave a classic example of from a proactive local government that really the Labor Party trying to catch up. He spoke could rewrite the rules with regard to recy- about his own state of Tasmania, where the cled water use. It would contribute signifi- Labor Party were absolutely annihilated be- cantly to advancing the cause of sustainable

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 137 cause the blue-collar workers voted against will make some forward steps, some pro- the Labor Party. The blue-collar workers in gress, in saving and using water more clev- that state understood that the Labor Party erly. Senator Santoro is correct in his praise stood for the latte set in Sydney and Mel- for Toowoomba. Mayor Di Thorley is a very bourne and were not at all interested in innovative and enthusiastic leader and she workers, unionists and their jobs in country lives, eats and breathes her particular project. Tasmania. Senator O’Brien is desperately Whilst it is inappropriate for me to comment trying to catch up, trying to get some of the on the ultimate fate of her application, it is a workers back on side, but the sorts of words project which she argues for very well and he uses will not help get the workers back which will obviously add value to her com- until the Labor Party start concentrating on munity and to the Australian government’s what blue-collar workers need. It is quite long-term aims for the wise use of water. clear that most working men and women of Peter Lindsay, the member for Herbert, Australia now think—and think quite rightly, also has some good Water Smart projects I might add—that the Howard government is under way. I am delighted with the success the political party that supports their real of the Mackay project, which Senator interests. I am delighted to be a member of a Santoro has mentioned. I well remember party that is really looking after the working when Mayor Julie Boyd first came to this man’s and woman’s interests in Australia. building seeking some assistance. She had It is always a great delight to hear from with her an adviser, Mr Ross Cunningham, Senator Cook and, again, there is going to be who had some understanding of water. I re- a real void in this chamber when he retires at member when they first came here to raise the end of this month. I do not very often this project many years ago. It started in a agree with what Senator Cook says but I al- small way. They came down and made their ways listen intently, because he has a very case. The government did not have a pro- precise way of making his arguments. His gram that could help them at the time, but it arguments are all well constructed and very is interesting to see how a good lobbying well argued. I could take issue with his con- effort and a good submission made very clusions in a lot of the matters he mentioned forcefully can over a period of time lead to tonight, but there is going to be a void when some positive outcomes. The Mackay project Senator Cook is no longer in the Senate and will be a very good one. we no longer get some of the more thought- Finally, whilst I am on my feet and talking ful contributions that we got from him. about Senator Santoro, I thank him for going Finally, I want to support Senator to the Mackay-Whitsunday area. He was in Santoro’s comments on the Water Smart pro- Mackay for the Bakers Creek function, as he gram, part of the Howard government’s Na- mentioned, but also to assist me by opening tional Water Initiative and something that I the Whitsunday boating and leisure show at am delighted to be involved in. Senator Ian Airlie Beach. It was a job, I am told by reli- Campbell and I will be handling the commu- able authorities, which Senator Santoro per- nity water grants program, which we are formed exceptionally well, and I thank him about to launch and which will provide up to for filling in for me. $50,000, even $100,000, for communities to Senator Santoro—I intend to do an ad- do clever things with water in their local journment speech on it one day. area. It is a program—some $200 million— that will be well received in the country and

CHAMBER 138 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Senator IAN MACDONALD—I am sure Human Rights and Equal Opportunity you will, Senator Santoro, and I shall, as Commission—Report—No. 28—Inquiry with all of your speeches, listen intently to into complaints by immigration detainees get the finer details of what happened. Thank concerning their detention at the Curtin you for doing that. A lot of interesting things Immigration Reception and Processing Centre. are happening in Queensland, and it is good to be able to say a couple of words about Judge Advocate General—Report for 2004. them in these open-ended adjournment de- Local Government (Financial Assistance) bates. Act 1995—Report for 2003-04 on the op- eration of the Act. Senate adjourned at 7.59 pm Pharmaceutical Benefits Pricing Author- DOCUMENTS ity—Supplementary report for 2003-04 on Tabling the operations of the Authority in relation to the Pharmaceutical Industry Investment The following government documents Program. were tabled: Regional Forest Agreements Act 2002— Aboriginal Land Commissioner—Report Review of the Forest and Wood Products and explanatory statement by the Minister Council—Prepared by Jaakko Pöyry Con- for Immigration and Multicultural and In- sulting, February 2005. digenous Affairs—No. 68—Upper Roper River land claims comprising Mataranka Treaty—Bilateral—Singapore-Australia Area (NT portion 916) land claim (Claim Free Trade Agreement Amendments— no. 129); Western Roper River (Beds and Section C: Documentary evidence.[Text of Banks) land claim (Claim no. 141); Roper other amendments and an earlier version Valley Area land claim (Claim no. 164) of this amendment tabled on 15 March and Elsey Region land claim (Claim no. 2005, together with national interest 245). analysis and annexures]. Australian Broadcasting Authority— Western Australian Fisheries Joint Author- Online content co-regulatory scheme— ity—Report for 2001-02. Report for the period 1 July to 31 Decem- Workplace relations—Ministerial state- ber 2004. ment by the Prime Minister (Mr Howard). Australian Competition and Consumer Tabling Commission—Telecommunications reports The following documents were tabled by for 2003-04—Report 1: Telecommunica- the Clerk: tions competitive safeguards; Report 2: Changes in the prices paid for telecommu- [Legislative instruments are identified by a nications services in Australia 1997-98 to Federal Register of Legislative Instruments 2003-04. (FRLI) number] Australian River Co. Limited—Report for Air Services Act—Air Services Regula- 1 December 2003 to 30 November 2004. tions—Instruments Nos— Fuel Quality Standards Act 2000— AERU-05-11—Flight Information Re- Independent statutory review of the opera- gions [F2005L01155]*. tion of the Act—Final report prepared by AERU-05-12—Class A Airspace Fuel Quality Standards Act Review Panel [F2005L01154]*. with assistance from Economic Associates AERU-05-13—Class C Airspace (Australia) Pty Ltd and SWB Consulting [F2005L01156]*. Pty Ltd, April 2005.

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 139

AERU-05-14—Class C Control Zones Brisbane Analog Television—No. 1 of [F2005L01163]*. 2005 [F2005L01184]*. AERU-05-15—Class D Airspace Remote Central and Eastern Australia [F2005L01164]*. (Radio)—No. 1 of 2005 AERU-05-16—Class D Control Zones [F2005L01183]*. [F2005L01165]*. Charter of the United Nations Act— AERU-05-17—Class E Airspace Select Legislative Instruments 2005 [F2005L01166]*. Nos— AERU-05-18—Class G Airspace 97—Charter of the United Nations [F2005L01168]*. (Sanctions—Cote d’Ivoire) Regula- AERU-05-19—General Aviation Aero- tions 2005 [F2005L01236]*. drome Procedures (GAAP) Control 98—Charter of the United Nations Zones [F2005L01169]*. (Sanctions—Democratic Republic of AERU-05-22—Controlled Aerodromes the Congo) Regulations 2005 [F2005L01170]*. [F2005L01233]*. Airports Act—Select Legislative Instru- 99—Charter of the United Nations ment 2005 No. 101—Airports (Control of (Sanctions—Sudan) Regulations On-Airport Activities) Amendment Regu- 2005 [F2005L01235]*. lations 2005 (No. 1) [F2005L01220]*. Christmas Island Act—Lotteries Commis- Australian Capital Territory (Planning and sion Act 1990 (WA) (CI)— Land Management) Act—National Capital Determination of player loss, dated Plan—Amendment 39: Deakin/Forrest 4 May 2005 [F2005L01232]*. Residential Area [F2005L01290]*. Lotteries Commission Amendment Or- Australian Prudential Regulation Authority dinance 2005 (No. 1) [F2005L01222]*. Act— Lotteries Commission (Designated Au- Instrument fixing charges to be paid to thorities) Amendment Regulations 2005 APRA No. 1 of 2005—Provision of sta- (No. 1) [F2005L01224]*. tistical information to RBA and ABS in Civil Aviation Act— 2004-05 [F2005L01128]*. Civil Aviation Regulations— Non-Confidentiality Determination No. Civil Aviation Amendment Order 5 of 2005—Information provided by lo- cally-incorporated banks and foreign (No. 5) 2005—Aircraft endorse- ments—Helicopters ADIs under Reporting Standard ARS 320.0 (2003) [F2005L01185]*. [F2005L01139]*. Australian Research Council Act— Civil Aviation Amendment Order (No. 6) 2005—Aircraft endorse- Determination No. 26—Approval of ex- penditure on research programs under sec- ments—Aeroplanes [F2005L01140]*. tion 51— Special Research Initiatives, dated Instruments Nos— 15 April 2005; CASA 167/05—Direction—Use of mobile telephones and hand Linkage International: Anglo-Australian Observatory Fellowship, dated 7 May held personal data assistants dur- ing refuelling [F2005L01198]*. 2005. CASA 193/05—Direction— Broadcasting Services Act—Variations to Licence Area Plans for— Carriage of cabin attendant in hot air balloon [F2005L01386]*.

CHAMBER 140 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

CASA 194/05—Direction— AD/AS 355/87—Untimely Firing Carriage of cabin attendant in hot of Squibs [F2005L01380]*. air balloon [F2005L01387]*. AD/B717/1 Amdt 2—Horizontal CASA 198/05—Approval—Use Stabiliser Jackscrew of Class A airspace by gliders [F2005L01342]*. [F2005L01427]*. AD/B717/4 Amdt 2—Rudder CASA 204/05—Direction— Trim Control [F2005L01343]*. Carriage of cabin attendants in hot AD/B717/5 Amdt 1—Spoiler air balloons [F2005L01281]*. Hold-Down Actuator Supports CASA 205/05—Direction— [F2005L01344]*. Carriage of cabin attendants in hot AD/B717/9 Amdt 1—Wing Rear air balloons [F2005L01282]*. Spar [F2005L01345]*. CASA 214/05—Direction— AD/B717/13 Amdt 1—Horizontal Carriage of cabin attendants in hot Stabilizer Outer Skin Panels air balloons [F2005L01406]*. [F2005L01346]*. CASA VTA 147/05—Approval— AD/B727/149—Elevator Rear Operations without an approved Spar—2 [F2005L01347]*. cockpit voice recorder AD/B737/238 Amdt 1—Digital [F2005L01394]*. Transient Suppression Units Civil Aviation Safety Regulations— [F2005L01349]*. Airworthiness Directives—Part— AD/B737/244—Engine Strut Seal 105— [F2005L01350]*. AD/750XL/4—Fuselage Frame at AD/B747/281 Amdt 1—Upper Station 384.62 [F2005L01331]*. Deck Floor Beam Upper Chord AD/750XL/5—Outer Wing At- and Web [F2005L01351]*. tachments [F2005L01332]*. AD/B747/323 Amdt 1—Nose AD/A320/176—Centre Fuel Tank Wheel Well Top and Side Panel Bonding [F2005L01333]*. Webs and Stiffeners AD/A320/177—Left and Right [F2005L01378]*. Wing Fuel Tank Bonding AD/B767/146 Amdt 1— [F2005L01334]*. Horizontal Stabiliser Pivot Bulk- AD/A320/178—Trimmable Hori- head [F2005L01354]*. zontal Stabilizer Actuator AD/BAe 146/35 Amdt 2—MLG [F2005L01335]*. Door Hinge Bracket AD/A330/13 Amdt 3—Life Lim- [F2005L01355]*. its/Monitored Parts AD/BELL 206/154 Amdt 1— [F2005L01336]*. Freewheel Aft Bearing Cap AD/A330/30 Amdt 3—Argo- [F2005L01356]*. Tech/Intertechnique Vent Float AD/BELL 407/28 Amdt 1— Valves [F2005L01337]*. Freewheel Aft Bearing Cap AD/A330/45 Amdt 1—Wing Rib [F2005L01357]*. 6 [F2005L01338]*. AD/CESSNA 208/17—Flight into AD/AMD 50/33—Central Engine Icing Conditions Mast Rivets [F2005L01340]*. [F2005L01358]*.

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 141

AD/CESSNA 208/18— AD/JETSTREAM/96 Amdt 1— Emergency Power Lever Shear Landing Gear Rod Spherical Wire [F2005L01360]*. Bearing [F2005L01302]*. AD/CESSNA 750/2—Chafing of AD/JETSTREAM/100—Landing APU Fuel Tube Assembly Gear Radius Rod Cylinder Crack- [F2005L01211]*. ing [F2005L01301]*. AD/DAUPHIN/68 Amdt 1—Main AD/S-PUMA/59—Ice and Rain Gearbox Base Plate Protection—Electrical Multi- [F2005L01363]*. Purpose Air Intakes AD/DAUPHIN/79—Life Raft In- [F2005L01322]*. stallation [F2005L01267]*. AD/SWSA226/86 Amdt 2—Wing AD/DHC-8/101—Fire Bottle Spar Centre Web Cutout Electrical Connectors [F2005L01323]*. [F2005L01364]*. 106— AD/EC 120/14—Tail Rotor AD/ARRIUS/8—Free Turbine Driveshaft—Rear Driveshaft Fric- Overspeed Protection System tion Ring [F2005L01146]*. [F2005L01148]*. AD/ECUREUIL/111—Untimely AD/ASTAZOU/5—Return to Firing of Squibs [F2005L01381]*. Service for Civil Use AD/EMB-120/29 Amdt 3— [F2005L01341]*. Elevator Trim System AD/CFM56/7 Amdt 4—Fan Disk [F2005L01365]*. Inspection [F2005L01362]*. AD/F27/158—Main Landing AD/JT8D/12 Amdt 2—High Pres- Gear Drag Stay Units sure Compressor Disc Tie Rod [F2005L01416]*. Hole [F2005L01303]*. AD/F28/89—APU Enclosure AD/JT8D/18 Amdt 2—Second Drains and Wiring Stage Turbine Disc [F2005L01370]*. [F2005L01304]*. AD/F100/65—Fuselage ELT Sys- AD/JT8D/21 Amdt 1—High Pres- tem Antenna [F2005L01366]*. sure Compressor Spacers AD/F100/66—Wing Rear Spar [F2005L01305]*. Lower Girder [F2005L01367]*. AD/JT8D/22 Amdt 5— AD/F100/68—Passenger Service Combustion Chamber Outer Case Unit, Speaker, Oxygen and Blind [F2005L01306]*. Panels Attachments AD/JT8D/31 Amdt 1—No. 7 Fuel [F2005L01369]*. Nozzle and Support Assembly AD/F406/12—Rudder Pulley [F2005L01311]*. Bracket [F2005L01371]*. AD/JT8D/34 Amdt 1—4th Stage AD/F406/14—Rudder Hinge LPT Hub Inspection Brackets and Bearings [F2005L01313]*. [F2005L01299]*. AD/JT8D/38 Amdt 1—Critical AD/HS 125/175—Emergency Life-limited Rotating Engine Radio Wiring [F2005L01188]*. Components [F2005L01314]*. AD/HU 269/111—Lateral Control AD/RB211/32 Amdt 2—Stage 5 Trim Actuator Assembly Compressor Disc—Inspection [F2005L01315]*. [F2005L01320]*.

CHAMBER 142 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

AD/TURMO/6—Return to Ser- 61—Criminal Code Amendment Regu- vice for Civil Use lations 2005 (No. 7) [F2005L00706]*. [F2005L01324]*. 62—Criminal Code Amendment Regu- 107— lations 2005 (No. 8) [F2005L00850]*. AD/PHOF/2 Amdt 3—Propeller 85—Criminal Code Amendment Regu- Hub [F2005L01318]*. lations 2005 (No. 9) [F2005L01201]*. Class Rulings CR 2005/29-CR 2005/43. 86—Criminal Code Amendment Regu- Classification (Publications, Films and lations 2005 (No. 10) [F2005L01202]*. Computer Games) Act— 87—Criminal Code Amendment Regu- Classification (Markings for Films and lations 2005 (No. 11) [F2005L01203]*. Computer Games) Determination 2005 88—Criminal Code Amendment Regu- [F2005L01276]*. lations 2005 (No. 12) [F2005L01204]*. Guidelines for the Classification of Customs Act— Films and Computer Games Select Legislative Instruments 2005 [F2005L01286]*. Nos— Guidelines for the Classification of Pub- 77—Customs Amendment Regula- lications [F2005L01285]*. tions 2005 (No. 2) [F2005L01006]*. National Classification Code 80—Customs Amendment Regula- [F2005L01284]*. tions 2005 (No. 3) [F2005L01086]*. Corporations Act— 95—Customs (Prohibited Exports) Accounting Standard AASB 2005-1— Amendment Regulations 2005 (No. Amendments to Australian Accounting 2) [F2005L01003]*. Standard [F2005L01283]*. Tariff Concession Orders— ASIC Class Orders— 0403927 [F2005L01312]*. [CO 05/308] [F2005L01187]*. 0413698 [F2005L01251]*. [CO 05/508] [F2005L01206]*. 0501207 [F2005L01262]*. Variation of Financial Stability Standard 0501211 [F2005L01422]*. for Securities Settlement facilities FSS 2005.1 [F2005L01377]*. 0502565 [F2005L01177]*. Crimes Act—Select Legislative Instrument 0502567 [F2005L01252]*. 2005 No. 81—Crimes Amendment Regula- 0502568 [F2005L01253]*. tions 2005 (No. 1) [F2005L01124]*. 0502713 [F2005L01325]*. Criminal Code Act—Select Legislative In- 0502855 [F2005L01254]*. struments 2005 Nos— 0502885 [F2005L01255]*. 36—Criminal Code Amendment Regu- 0502990 [F2005L01256]*. lations 2005 (No. 2) [F2005L00699]* 0502991 [F2005L01257]*. 57—Criminal Code Amendment Regu- lations 2005 (No. 3) [F2005L00703]*. 0503015 [F2005L01258]*. 58—Criminal Code Amendment Regu- 0503065 [F2005L01259]*. lations 2005 (No. 4) [F2005L00702]*. 0503077 [F2005L01260]*. 59—Criminal Code Amendment Regu- 0503095 [F2005L01261]*. lations 2005 (No. 5) [F2005L00707]* 0503390 [F2005L01421]*. 60—Criminal Code Amendment Regu- 0503523 [F2005L01327]*. lations 2005 (No. 6) [F2005L00701]*. 0503563 [F2005L01328]*.

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 143

0503596 [F2005L01423]*. National Recovery Plans for— 0503635 [F2005L01424]*. Abbott’s Booby (Papasula abbotti) 0503662 [F2005L01425]*. [F2005L01295]*. Tariff Concession Revocation Instru- Tectaria devexa [F2005L01296]*. ments— Export Control Act—Export Control (Or- 7/2005 [F2005L01189]*. ders) Regulations—Livestock Export (Me- rino) Orders (Amendment) No. 1 of 2005 8/2005 [F2005L01249]*. [F2005L01402]*. 9/2005 [F2005L01250]*. Family Law Act— Defence Act— Family Law (Superannuation) Regula- Determination of Prohibited Substances, tions— dated 23 May 2005 [F2005L01272]*. Family Law (Superannuation) Determinations under section 58B— (Methods and Factors for Valuing Defence Determinations— Particular Superannuation Interests) 2005/12—Overseas conditions of Amendment Approval 2005 (No. 4) service—amendment. [F2005L01178]*. 2005/13—Education costs of child. Family Law (Superannuation) (Pro- 2005/14—Conditions of service— vision of Information— repeal, savings and transitional. Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme) Amendment Determination 2005/15—General. 2005 (No. 1) [F2005L01179]*. 2005/16—Navy engineer officer re- Family Law (Superannuation) (Pro- tention allowance. vision of Information—Defence Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities Force Schemes) Amendment Deter- Act—Diplomatic Privileges and Immuni- mination 2005 (No. 1) ties Regulations—Certificates under regu- [F2005L01181]*. lation 5A, dated 10 May 2005 [2]. Family Law (Superannuation) (Pro- Environment Protection and Biodiversity vision of Information—Military Su- Conservation Act— perannuation and Benefits Scheme) Adoption of State Plans as Recovery Amendment Determination 2005 Plans [F2005L01289]*. (No. 1) [F2005L01182]*. Amendments of lists of— Family Law (Superannuation) (Pro- vision of Information—Public Sector Exempt native specimens, dated Superannuation Scheme) Amend- 23 May 2005 [F2005L01248]*. ment Determination 2005 (No. 1) Threatened ecological communities, [F2005L01180]*. dated 29 April 2005 Select Legislative Instrument 2005 No. [F2005L01134]*. 89—Family Law (Superannuation) Threatened species, dated— Amendment Regulations 2005 (No. 2) 13 May 2005 [F2005L01385]*. [F2005L01197]*. 19 May 2005 [F2005L01388]*. Federal Court of Australia Act—Select 24 May 2005 [F2005L01389]*. Legislative Instrument 2005 No. 84— Federal Court (Corporations) Amendment Great Australian Bight Marine Park Rules 2005 (No. 1) [F2005L01219]*. (Commonwealth Waters) Management Plan 2005-2012 [F2005L01162]*. Financial Management and Accountability Act—

CHAMBER 144 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Financial Management and Account- Office of the Renewable Energy ability Determinations— Regulator [F2005L01353]*. 2005/07—Military Death Claim Fisheries Administration Act—Select Leg- Compensation Special Account Es- islative Instrument 2005 No. 79—Fisheries tablishment 2005 [F2005L01247]*. (Administration) Amendment Regulations 2005/08—Energy Special Account 2005 (No. 1) [F2005L01104]*. Establishment 2005 Fisheries Management Act—Select Legis- [F2005L01474]*. lative Instrument 2005 No. 91—Fisheries 2005/09—Defence Materiel Special Management (Heard Island and McDonald Account Establishment 2005 Islands Fishery) Amendment Regulations [F2005L01437]*. 2005 (No. 1) [F2005L01149]*. 2005/10—Other Trust Moneys— Food Standards Australia New Zealand Defence Materiel Organisation Spe- Act—Australia New Zealand Food Stan- cial Account Establishment 2005 dards Code—Amendment No. 78—2005 [F2005L01438]*. [F2005L01246]*. 2005/11—Other Trust Moneys— Goods and Services Tax Ruling— Commonwealth Grants Commission Addendum—GSTR 2000/16. Special Account Establishment 2005 Health Insurance Act— [F2005L01439]*. Declaration of quality assurance activ- 2005/12—Other Trust Moneys— ity—QAA No. 1/2005 [F2005L01173]*. Department of Human Services Spe- Health Insurance (Eligible Collection cial Account Establishment 2005 Centres) Approval Principles 2005 [F2005L01443]*. [F2005L01412]*. 2005/13—Other Trust Moneys— Select Legislative Instrument 2005 No. National Water Commission Special 100—Health Insurance (Pathology Ser- Account Establishment 2005 vices) Amendment Regulations 2005 [F2005L01447]*. (No. 1) [F2005L01221]*. 2005/14—Human Pituitary Hor- Higher Education Funding Act— mones Special Account Variation and Determination No. T66-2004—Grants Abolition 2005 [F2005L01465]*. for Expenditure for Operating Purposes 2005/15—Human Pituitary Hor- (Marginal Funding Estimates (Over En- mones Special Account Establish- rolments)) [F2005L01207]*. ment 2005 [F2005L01466]*. Factor to index an accumulated HEC Net Appropriation Agreements for— debt [F2005L01176]*. AusAid (Administered) Higher Education Support Act— [F2005L01158]*. Administration Guidelines, dated AusAid (Departmental) 15 April 2005 [F2005L01196]*. [F2005L01157]*. Funding agreements, dated— Australian Radiation Protection and 11 April 2004—Christian Heritage Nuclear Safety Agency [F2005L01193]*. College Limited. National Blood Authority 6 December 2004—Tabor College Incorporated (SA). [F2005L01161]*. 25 May 2005—Queensland Univer- National Water Commission [F2005L01245]*. sity of Technology.

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 145

Higher Education Provider Approval Organisations for the purposes of (No. 6 of 2005)—International College paragraph 459.214(c) of Hotel Management Incorporated [F2005L01223]*. [F2005L01138]*. Passports for the purposes of Tax File Number Guidelines for Higher paragraph 417.211(3)(a) Education Providers and Open Univer- [F2005L01122]*. sities Australia [F2005L01383]*. Select Legislative Instrument 2005 No. Income Tax Assessment Act 1997—Select 76—Migration Amendment Regulations Legislative Instrument 2005 No. 102— 2005 (No. 2) [F2005L00858]*. Income Tax Assessment Amendment Motor Vehicle Standards Act—Select Leg- Regulations 2005 (No. 3) islative Instrument 2005 No. 78—Motor [F2005L01200]*. Vehicle Standards Amendment Regulations Lands Acquisition Act—Statements de- 2005 (No. 1) [F2005L01125]*. scribing property acquired by agreement National Health Act— for specified public purposes under sec- tions— Arrangements Nos— 40. PB 12 of 2005—Highly Specialised Drugs Program [F2005L01265]*. 125. PB 13 of 2005—Chemotherapy Migration Act— Pharmaceuticals Access Program Migration Agents Regulations—MARA [F2005L01274]*. Notice MN20-05 of 2005— Declaration No. PB 10 of 2005 Migration Agents (Continuing Pro- [F2005L01263]*. fessional Development—Attendance Determinations Nos— at a Seminar, Workshop, Conference or Lecture) [F2005L01145]*. HIB 10/2005 [F2005L01153]*. Migration Agents (Continuing Pro- PB 11 of 2005 [F2005L01264]*. fessional Development—Preparation Navigation Act—Marine Orders No. 3 of of Material for Presentation) 2005—Cargo and Cargo Handling—Grain [F2005L01143]*. [F2005L01209]*. Migration Agents (Continuing Pro- Ozone Protection and Synthetic Green- fessional Development—Private house Gas Management Act—Select Leg- Study of Audio, Video or Written islative Instrument 2005 No. 90—Ozone Material) [F2005L01144]*. Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas Migration Regulations— Management Amendment Regulations 2005 (No. 2) [F2005L01205]*. Determinations of maximum num- Primary Industries (Customs) Charges bers of— Act—Select Legislative Instrument 2005 Aged Parent (Residence) (Class No. 92—Primary Industries (Customs) BP) Visas that may be granted in Charges Amendment Regulations 2005 the 2004/2005 financial year (No. 1) [F2005L01226]*. [F2005L01287]*. Primary Industries (Excise) Levies Act— Parent (Migrant) (Class AX) Visas Select Legislative Instrument 2005 No. that may be granted in the 93—Primary Industries (Excise) Levies 2004/2005 financial year Amendment Regulations 2005 (No. 2) [F2005L01288]*. [F2005L01218]*. Specifications of— Primary Industries Levies and Charges Collection Act—Select Legislative Instru-

CHAMBER 146 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

ment 2005 No. 94—Primary Industries Special Benefit) Determination 2005 Levies and Charges Collection Amendment (No. 2) [F2005L01171]*. Regulations 2005 (No. 1) Social Security (Means Test Treatment [F2005L01227]*. of Private Trusts—Excluded Trusts) Product Rulings— Declaration 2005 [Department of Edu- Addenda—PR 2004/28 and PR cation, Science and Training] 2004/33. [F2005L01195]*. PR 2005/74-PR 2005/89. Social Security (Means Test Treatment of Private Trusts—Excluded Trusts) Quarantine Act—Quarantine Amendment Declaration 2005 [Department of Em- Proclamation 2005 (No. 2) ployment and Workplace Relations] [F2005L01228]*. [F2005L01191]*. Radiocommunications Act— Social Security (Means Test Treatment Radiocommunications (406 MHz Satel- of Private Trusts—Excluded Trusts) lite Distress Beacons) Standard 2005 Declaration 2005 [Department of Fam- [F2005L01403]*. ily and Community Services] Radiocommunications (Analogue [F2005L01190]*. Speech (Angle Modulated) Equipment) Student Assistance Act—Factor to index Standard 2005 [F2005L01401]*. Financial Supplement debts and accumu- Radiocommunications Devices (Com- lated Financial Supplement debts pliance Labelling) Amendment Notice [F2005L01174]*. 2005 (No. 1) [F2005L01404]*. Superannuation (Financial Assistance Radiocommunications (Spectrum Des- Funding) Levy Act and Financial Institu- ignation) Notice No. 1 of 2005 tions Supervisory Levies Collection Act— [F2005L01373]*. Select Legislative Instrument 2005 No. Remuneration Tribunal Act— 82—Superannuation (Financial Assistance Determinations— Funding) Levy and Collection Regulations 2005 [F2005L01103]*. 2005/05: Remuneration and Allowances for Holders of Part-time Public Office Superannuation Guarantee Ruling—Notice [F2005L01141]*. of Withdrawal—SGR 93/2. 2005/06: Remuneration and Allowances Superannuation Industry (Supervision) for Holders of Full-time Public Office Act—Request from Minister to APRA un- [F2005L01142]*. der section 230A, dated 27 October 2003. 2005/07: Principal Executive Office Sydney Airport Curfew Act—Curfew Dis- (PEO) Classification Structure and pensation Report—Dispensation No. 3/05 Terms and Conditions [F2005L01130]*. [5 dispensations]. 2005/08: Members of Parliament— Taxation Administration Act— Travelling Allowance [F2005L01131]*. Notices of Variation—Variation of 2005/09: Members of Parliament— amounts to be withheld from certain Entitlements [F2005L01132]*. payments made by— 2005/10: Remuneration and Allowances External administrators, dated for Holders of Public Office 13 May 2005 [F2005L01215]*. [F2005L01137]*. Trustees of bankrupt estates, dated Social Security Act— 13 May 2005 [F2005L01216]*. Social Security (Class of Visas—Newly Select Legislative Instrument 2005 No. Arrived Resident’s Waiting Period for 103—Taxation Administration Amend-

CHAMBER Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 147

ment Regulations 2005 (No. 1) Telecommunications (Recovery of ITU [F2005L01199]*. Budget Contribution) Determination Taxation Administration Act Withhold- 2005 [F2005L01400]*. ing Schedules 2005 (2004 Budget Therapeutic Goods Act—Order— Changes) [F2005L01270]. Definition of British Pharmacopoeia, dated Taxation Administration Act Withhold- 19 May 2005 [F2005L01237]*. ing Schedules 2005 (2005 Budget Trade Practices Act—Select Legislative In- Changes) [F2005L01271]. strument 2005 No. 83—Trade Practices Taxation Determinations— (Consumer Product Safety Standard) (Baby Bath Aids) Regulations 2005 Addendum—TD 94/25. [F2005L01129]*. Notices of Withdrawal— Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards TD 92/199. Act—Select Legislative Instrument 2005 TD 93/229. No. 96—Water Efficiency Labelling and TD 94/98. Standards Regulations 2005 [F2005L01243]*. TD 96/34. Workplace Relations Act—Revocation of TD 2005/14-TD 2005/20. Directions and Directions to Inspectors, Taxation Rulings— dated 16 May 2005 [F2005L01213]*. Notices of Withdrawal— Governor-General’s Proclamations— TR 96/25. Commencement of Provisions of Acts TR 1999/3 and TR 1999/D21. Administrative Appeals Tribunal Amend- ment Act 2005—Items 1 to 110, 112 to 180 TR 2005/6-TR 2005/8. and 182 to 236 of Schedule 1—16 May Telecommunications Act— 2005 [F2005L01029]*. Telecommunications Labelling (Cus- Customs Legislation Amendment and Re- tomer Equipment and Customer Ca- peal (International Trade Modernisation) bling) Amendment Notice 2005 (No. 1) Act 2001—Item 43 of Schedule 3—18 [F2005L01292]*. May 2005 [F2005L01087]*. Telecommunications Technical Standard Trade Practices Amendment (Australian (Customer Access Equipment for Con- Energy Market) Act 2004—Schedules 1 nection to a Telecommunications Net- and 2—23 May 2005 [F2005L01121]*. work—AS/ACIF S003:2005) 2005 * Explanatory statement tabled with legisla- [F2005L01231]*. tive instrument. Telecommunications Technical Standard (Requirements for Customer Equipment Departmental and Agency Contracts for Connection to a metallic local loop The following document was tabled pur- interface of a Telecommunications Net- suant to the order of the Senate of 20 June work—Part 2: Broadband—AS/ACIF 2001, as amended: S043.2:2005) 2005 [F2005L01229]*. Departmental and agency contracts for Telecommunications (Carrier Licence 2004—Letter of advice—Immigration and Charges) Act— Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs port- Telecommunications (Costs Attributable folio agencies. to Telecommunications Functions and Powers) Determination 2005 [F2005L01398]*.

CHAMBER 148 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE The following answers to questions were circulated:

Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry: Advertising Campaign (Question No. 131) Senator Faulkner asked the Minister representing the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, upon notice, on 19 November 2004: (1) Not including any advertising campaigns contained in questions on notice nos 105 to 121, for each of the financial years, 2003-04 and 2004-05 to date: (a) what is the cost of any current or proposed advertising campaign in the department; (b) what are the details of the campaign, including: (a) creative agency or agencies engaged; (b) research agency or agencies engaged; (c) the cost of television advertising; (d) the cost and nature of any mail out; and (e) the full cost of advertising placement. (2) When will the campaign begin, and when is it planned to end. (3) (a) What appropriations will the department use to authorise any of the payments either committed to be made or proposed to be made as part of this advertising campaign; (b) will those appropria- tions be made in the 2003-04 or 2004-05 financial year; (c) will the appropriations relate to a de- partmental or administered item or the Advance to the Minister for Finance and Administration; and (d) if an appropriation relates to a departmental or administered item, what is the relevant line item in the relevant Portfolio Budget Statement for that item. (4) Has a request been made of the Minister for Finance and Administration to issue a drawing right to pay out moneys for any part of the advertising campaign; if so: (a) what are the details of that re- quest; and (b) against which particular appropriation is it requested that the money be paid. (5) Has the Minister for Finance and Administration issued a drawing right as referred to in paragraph (4) above; if so, what are the details of that drawing right. (6) Has an official or minister made a payment of public money or debited an amount against an ap- propriation in accordance with a drawing right issued by the Minister for Finance and Administra- tion for any part of the advertising campaign. Senator Ian Macdonald—The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry has pro- vided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) (a) The advertising placement costs (TV, print, internet and airport signage) of the Quarantine Matters! awareness campaign in 2003-04 was $2.264 million. The advertising schedule for the full year 2004-05 has yet to be finalised. Specific Avian Influenza (Bird Flu) quarantine awareness advertising (print and airport sign- age) to the value of $0.115 million was undertaken in 2003-04, and between $0.542 million and $0.737 million of advertising is scheduled for 2004-05, depending on the magnitude and ramifications for Australia of any international Bird Flu outbreak that may occur during the period. (b) (a) Killey Withy Punshon (KWP!) Advertising Pty Ltd for both the Quarantine Matters! and Bird Flu campaigns; (b) Open Mind Research Group Pty Ltd, for both campaigns; (c) Quaran- tine Matters! in 2003-04 - $1.357 million; 2004-05 – yet to be determined; Avian Influenza (Bird Flu) in 2003-04 – nil; 2004-05 – nil planned; (d) not applicable; and (e) the advertising placement costs (TV, print, internet and airport signage) of the Quarantine Matters! awareness campaign in 2003-04 was $2.264 million. The advertising schedule for 2004-05 has yet to be finalised. Specific Avian Influenza (Bird Flu) quarantine awareness advertising (print and air-

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 149

port signage) to the value of $0.115 million was undertaken in 2003-04, and between $0.542 million and $0.737 million of advertising is scheduled for 2004-05, depending on the magni- tude and ramifications for Australia of any international Bird Flu outbreak that may occur dur- ing the period. (2) The Quarantine Matters! awareness campaign began in 1997 and is ongoing. The Bird Flu quaran- tine awareness campaign began in June 2004 and will run throughout 2004-05. (3) (a) All AQIS advertising expenditure is authorised through Departmental Bill 1 Appropriations; (b) expenditure has been incurred in 2003-04 and will be incurred in the 2004-05 financial years. In the case of funding for Avian Influenza expenditure, an appropriation for prior year outputs was provided in the 2004-05 Budget for expenditure occurring in 2003-04; (c) the appropriations are all departmental in nature for AQIS expenditure; (d) the price of outputs for AQIS expenditure is out- lined on page 29 of the 2004-05 Portfolio Budget Statements. The Measure description for Avian Influenza is outlined on page 87 of the 2004-05 Portfolio Budget Statement. (4) The Drawing Rights issued for these payments are the existing Departmental Bill 1 appropriation, as the payments are consistent with the Departmental Outcome. (5) See above. (6) All payments for advertising expenditure fall under existing drawing rights mechanisms within the Department and have been duly authorised as part of this process. Environment and Heritage: Advertising Campaign (Question No. 138) Senator Faulkner asked the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, upon notice, on 19 November 2004: (1) Not including any advertising campaigns contained in questions on notice nos 105 to 121, for each of the financial years, 2003-04 and 2004-05 to date: (a) what is the cost of any current or proposed advertising campaign in the department; (b) what are the details of the campaign, including: (a) creative agency or agencies engaged; (b) research agency or agencies engaged; (c) the cost of television advertising; (d) the cost and nature of any mail out; and (e) the full cost of advertising placement. (2) When will the campaign begin, and when is it planned to end. (3) (a) What appropriations will the department use to authorise any of the payments either committed to be made or proposed to be made as part of this advertising campaign; (b) will those appropria- tions be made in the 2003-04 or 2004-05 financial year; (c) will the appropriations relate to a de- partmental or administered item or the Advance to the Minister for Finance and Administration; and (d) if an appropriation relates to a departmental or administered item, what is the relevant line item in the relevant Portfolio Budget Statement for that item. (4) Has a request been made of the Minister for Finance and Administration to issue a drawing right to pay out moneys for any part of the advertising campaign; if so: (a) what are the details of that re- quest; and (b) against which particular appropriation is it requested that the money be paid. (5) Has the Minister for Finance and Administration issued a drawing right as referred to in paragraph (4) above; if so, what are the details of that drawing right. (6) Has an official or minister made a payment of public money or debited an amount against an ap- propriation in accordance with a drawing right issued by the Minister for Finance and Administra- tion for any part of the advertising campaign. Senator Ian Campbell—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows:

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 150 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

The Department of the Environment and Heritage has no current or proposed advertising campaigns for 2003-04 and 2004-05 other than those contained in questions on notice nos 108 and 109. Human Cloning (Question No. 174) Senator Stott Despoja asked the Minister representing the Minister for Health and Ageing, upon notice, on 9 December 2004: (1) Will the Minister provide copies of any recommendations, advice or comments the department has received in the past 18 months regarding, or in response to, a proposal put forward by Belgium to the United Nations on the issue of ‘reproductive’ cloning of people and/or ‘therapeutic’ cloning of human embryos for research into cures for serious diseases. (2) Will the Minister provide copies of any recommendations, advice, comments or draft reports or recommendations prepared by the department regarding the review of Australia’s national legisla- tion on human reproductive cloning and/or human embryonic stem cell research. (3) (a) When is the review of the legislation on human reproductive cloning and human embryonic stem cell research expected to begin; and (b) does the Minister have responsibility for the review; if not, who does. Senator Patterson—The Minister for Ageing has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) This matter comes under the responsibility of the Minister for Foreign Affairs. (2) Advice prepared by the Department regarding the reviews of the Prohibition of Human Cloning Act 2002 and the Research Involving Human Embryos Act 2002 is confidential. (3) (a) The reviews of the Prohibition of Human Cloning Act 2002 and the Research Involving Human Embryos Act 2002 will commence in 2005. (b) The reviews will be independent of government. Minister Bishop will, in accordance with the Prohibition of Human Cloning Act 2002, appoint per- sons to undertake the reviews. Roads to Recovery Program Funding (Question No. 185) Senator Mark Bishop asked the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Re- gional Services, upon notice, on 17 December 2004: Under Auslink how will priorities within the funds currently allocated to the Roads to Recovery Pro- gram be decided with respect to national, state and local government involvement. Senator Ian Campbell—The Minister for Transport and Regional Services has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: Roads to Recovery funding will be provided under the following streams under AusLink: (a) $1.2 billion direct to councils over the four years commencing on 1 July 2005; (b) $150 million over 5 years beginning in 2004-05 for the regional strategic component of AusLink ($30 million of this has already been appropriated and is available in this financial year), including $30 million from 2005-06 to 2008-09 to the Governments of NSW, Victoria, South Australia and the Northern Territory for work in the unincorporated areas of those jurisdictions and to the Indian Ocean Territories (IOT) of Christmas and Cocos (Keeling) Islands. The $1.2 billion will be allocated to the jurisdictions on the following basis:

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 151

Jurisdiction Allocation $ NSW $340m Victoria $250m Queensland $250m WA $180m SA $100m Tasmania $40m NT $20m ACT $20m TOTAL $1,200m Within these allocations, each council will receive an allocation based on the recommendations of the State/NT Local Government Grants Commission for the Financial Assistance Grants roads component. The selection of projects to be funded will be entirely in the hands of the individual councils. Each council provides the Australian Government with a works programme and payments are made against these projects. The funding to be provided to the ACT will be provided to the ACT Government which has local gov- ernment responsibilities within its jurisdiction. The $30m for unincorporated areas and IOTs will be distributed as set out in the following table: Jurisdiction Allocation NSW $2.515m Victoria $0.064m SA $10.785m NT $16.000m IOT $0.636m TOTAL $30.000m Project selection in the unincorporated areas will be the responsibility of the jurisdictions concerned. Project selection in the Indian Ocean Territories will be in the hands of the Christmas and Cocos (Keel- ing) Island Shire Councils. Project selection for the regional strategic programme will be in the hands of the Australian Govern- ment but the process has not been finalised. Ansett Australia: Employee Entitlements (Question No. 262) Senator O’Brien asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 23 December 2004: (1) On what date did: (a) the Minister; (b) the Minister’s office; and (c) the department, become aware of the meeting of former Ansett employees on 27 November 2004 to discuss unpaid entitlements. (2) In each case in (1) what was the source of information. (3) Did: (a) the Minister; (b) the Minister’s office; and (c) the department, attend the meeting to ad- dress former Ansett employee concerns about outstanding employee entitlements. (4) In each case in (3) if not, why not. (5) On what date(s) has: (a) the Minister; (b) the Minister’s office; and (c) the department, met with representatives of former Ansett employees to discuss the matter of outstanding employee entitle- ments.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 152 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Senator Hill—The Prime Minister has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) (a), (b), and (c). On or after 15 November 2004. There is no record of the precise date. (2) (a), (b), and (c). Media reports. (3) (a), (b), and (c). No. (4) (a), (b), and (c). The Government has met in full its commitment to the former Ansett employees. The issue of any remaining outstanding entitlements is therefore a matter solely between the Ansett administrators and the former Ansett employees. (5) (a), (b), and (c). No meetings have occurred. Southern Supporter (Question No. 300) Senator O’Brien asked the Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation, upon notice, on 23 December 2004: With reference to the answer to paragraph (3)(a) of question on notice no. 565 (Senate Hansard, 11 November 2002, p. 6016): (1) Was the alleged broadcasting of bogus Emergency Position Indicating Rescue Beacon signals by the Volga to assist the illegal fishing vessel the Lena to evade hot pursuit by the Australian Fisher- ies Management Authority contracted Southern Supporter subject to investigation by Australian au- thorities; if so, what was the outcome of the investigation; if no investigation has been undertaken, why not. (2) Was the alleged broadcasting of bogus Emergency Position Indicating Rescue Beacon signals by the Florence during the Southern Supporter’s hot pursuit of the illegal fishing vessel the Lena, and the Florence’s alleged re-fuelling of the Lena, subject to investigation by Australian authorities; if so, what was the outcome of this investigation and what legal action, if any, has been initiated against the crew of the Florence; if no investigation has been undertaken, why not. Senator Ian Macdonald—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) I assume the Senator is referring to question on notice no. 565 (3) (b) rather than 565 (3) (a). Upon checking the information for this question, subsequent to previous question on notice no. 565, it became apparent that an incorrect vessel name was provided. The response to question on notice no. 565 (3) (b) should read “During an extended hot pursuit of the Lena by the Southern Supporter, two foreign fishing vessels, the Florence and the Champion, assisted the Lena by firstly broadcast- ing bogus Emergency Position Indicating Rescue Beacon (EPIRB) signals in an attempt to get the Southern Supporter to break off its hot pursuit. The Florence also re-fuelled the Lena. Whilst there had not been any recorded observations of the Florence or the Champion fishing in the Aus- tralian fishing zone (AFZ) around HIMI at that time, both vessels were strongly suspected of in- volvement in IUU fishing”. The Volga did not initiate a false distress beacon alert during the Lena pursuit over December 2001 – January 2002. However, a suspected sister ship, the Champion flagged to Bolivia did initiate a distress signal and AFMA forwarded a report on the incident to the Australian Maritime Surveil- lance Authority (AMSA) for further investigation. AMSA advised that the International Maritime Search and Rescue Convention 1979, covering Aus- tralia’s obligations in relation to providing search and rescue services in Australia’s designated search and rescue region, does not provide for the search and rescue authorities to investigate or take action over allegedly false distress beacon alerts. Consequently, Australian search and rescue authorities did not conduct further investigations into this incident.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 153

(2) No, AMSA advised that it did not have a mandate to investigate such incidents. Mr Peter Qasim (Question No. 310) Senator Allison asked the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Af- fairs, upon notice, on 10 January 2005: (1) What is the current immigration status of Mr Peter Qasim, a refugee from Kashmir. (2) How long has Mr Qasim been held in detention. (3) Has there been an investigation into reports that Mr Qasim was raped while in jail in Perth; if so, what was the outcome, if not, why not. (4) What is Mr Qasim’s mental health condition. (5) Has Mr Qasim attempted self harm; if so, what action has the Government taken to prevent further incidents. Senator Vanstone—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) Mr Qasim held in detention is currently an unlawful non citizen. He has not been recognised as a refugee. (2) to (5) Australia has strict privacy laws which limit the disclosure of information held on individu- als by the Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs. I am declining to provide the information sought as it would be an unreasonable intrusion into personal privacy, notwithstanding that parliamentary privilege might allow it. Transport Services (Question No. 319) Senator Hutchins asked the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 21 January 2005: (a) the directives, guidelines or other instructions issued or developed by the Minister regarding the procurement of transport services by the Commonwealth for either the department or issued to other Commonwealth departments or agencies; (b) the date on which such contracts were agreed; (c) the entity which the Commonwealth has contracted with; and (d) the total costs of these contracts for the 2003-04 financial year. and by “Transport services” the Senator means • Courier/freight delivery services. • Logistics arrangements eg such as a relocation services of offices. Senator Ian Campbell—The Minister for Transport and Regional Services has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (a) The department does not have separate directives, guidelines or other instructions issued or devel- oped specifically for the procurement of transport services. Procurement of these services are cov- ered by the department’s general procurement policies. (b) Pick N Pack Service - 14 November 2000 Australia and Messenger Post - 1 September 2003 (c) Pick N Pack Service Australia and Messenger Post - Australia Post

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 154 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

(d) Pick N Pack Service - $88,957.00 Australia and Messenger Post - $603,682.13 Please note that relocation services are logged through our service provider United KFPW. The pro- vider has a panel of pre-qualified suppliers that are used to undertake these moves. Captioning Services (Question No. 340) Senator Stott Despoja asked the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, upon notice, on 15 February 2005: Given the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s (ABC) recent decision to terminate its supply agree- ment with the Australian Caption Centre: Can the Minister explain what the ABC has done or what the Government will do to ensure that the vital information and consultative services previously provided by the Australian Caption Centre, including initiatives to ensure media access for people with sensory disabilities, are available to the Australian public at the same or better level than the Australian public has enjoyed to date. Senator Coonan—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: The decision to terminate its supply agreement with the Australian Caption Centre is a matter for the ABC. The ABC advises that the supply agreement between the ABC and the Australian Caption Centre did not include information and consultative services provided by the Australian Caption Centre such as live theatre captioning, cinema captioning, or the 1800 777 801 Freecall service. The ABC has engaged a new service provider to provide its closed captioning services. Questions concerning the Government’s provision of services for people with sensory disabilities are more appropriately addressed to the Minister for Health and Ageing or the Minister for Family and Community Services. Aviation Fuel (Question No. 350) Senator Mark Bishop asked the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Re- gional Services, upon notice, on 23 February 2005: (1) For each of the past 3 financial years: (a) what is the total quantity of aviation turbine fuel (AVTUR) and aviation gasoline (AVGAS) used by the Australian commercial and general aviation industries; (b) what is the amount of levies, excises and customs duties collected by the Commonwealth on AVTUR and AVGAS; and (c) what is the amount of levies, excises and customs duties collected by the Commonwealth on AVTUR and AVGAS provided to the Civil Aviation Safety Authority. (2) For each of the next 3 financial years: (a) what is the projected total quantity of AVTUR and AVGAS to be used by the Australian com- mercial and general aviation industries; and (b) what is the projected amount of levies, excises and customs duties to be collected by the Commonwealth on AVTUR and AVGAS. Senator Ian Campbell—The Minister for Transport and Regional Services has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 155

(1) (a) (b) (c) The quantity of Aviation Turbine Fuel (AVTUR) and Aviation Gasoline (AVGAS) on which excise was collected and from which revenue was appropriated to the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) is shown in the table below: Quantity and Revenue from AVTUR and AVGAS: 2001/02 – 2003/04 Financial Quantity of Fuel Government Revenue CASA Appropriation year (Megalitres) ($m) ($m) AVTUR AVGAS AVTUR AVGAS AVTUR AVGAS 2001/02 2,084.51 95.53 59.30 2.70 53.10 2.40 2002/03 2,023.59 94.32 57.60 2.60 51.60 2.40 2003/04 2,046.71 88.74 64.50 2.80 57.89 2.52 Data sources: Quantity of Fuel – Taxation Statistics 2001-02 and 2002-03, Australian Tax Office (ATO) Government Revenue – calculated from excise rates from ATO CASA Appropriation - Civil Aviation Safety Authority (2) The Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable Senator’s question: (a) Government does not publish these estimates. (b) In Table 6 of the 2004/05 Budget Paper No.1 Government projected a revenue of $230 million in 2004/05. However, in addition to AVTUR and AVGAS this amount includes fuel oil, heat- ing oil and kerosene Civil Aviation Safety Authority (Question No. 351) Senator Mark Bishop asked the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Re- gional Services, upon notice, on 23 February 2005: (1) For each of the past 3 financial years, what is the total amount spent by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) on: (a) domestic staff travel and accommodation; and (b) international staff travel and accommodation. (2) For each of the next 3 financial years, what is the projected amount to be spent by CASA on: (a) domestic staff travel and accommodation; and (b) international staff travel and accommodation. Senator Ian Campbell—The Minister for Transport and Regional Services has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) Please note that the international travel figures provided below relate to discretionary travel only (i.e. ICAO related travel, conferences, meetings and international liaison) 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Domestic $5,877,764 3,987,488 4,050,976 International $1,361,519 966,327 954,735 (2) The projected costs for (a) domestic travel and accommodation; and (b) international staff travel and accommodation are being considered as part of the 2005-06 Budget context.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 156 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Civil Aviation Safety Authority (Question No. 355) Senator Mark Bishop asked the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Re- gional Services, upon notice, on 23 February 2005: (1) What is the role of the agricultural unit established in the Civil Aviation Safety Authority’s (CASA) Tamworth office. (2) (a) How has any improvement or otherwise of the level of service delivery resulting from the es- tablishment of the unit been measured; and (b) would the Minister provide the results of any such measurement; if not, why not. (3) What is the proposed full staffing compliment for this unit. (4) How many staff are currently posted to this unit. (5) For each of the past 2 financial years, what has been the actual cost to CASA of operating the unit at the Tamworth office. (6) For each of the next 2 financial years, what is the projected cost to CASA of operating the unit at the Tamworth office. (7) Is a scale-back or closure of this unit currently under consideration by the Minister or his depart- ment; if so: (a) when will a decision be made on the scale-back or closure of this unit; (b) who will make the final decision; and (c) what, if any, changes to staffing levels at the Tamworth office are likely to result from any scale-back or closure of this unit. Senator Ian Campbell—The Minister for Transport and Regional Services has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) The role of the Agricultural Unit is to provide centralised prompt and consistent assessments and services to all 151 Agricultural Air Operator’s Certificate (AOC) holders across Australia in the Ae- rial Agricultural Industry. The work being conducted by the Agricultural Unit is the same work which was previously done by the various CASA Area Offices that are responsible for the regula- tory oversight of Agricultural AOC holders. (2) (a) Efficiency of the Agricultural Unit is measured by industry satisfaction with the service pro- vided and by the CASA Regulatory Services Branch Workflow Management System which tracks the time taken to process all jobs. (b) Improvements in service delivery resulting from the establishment of the Agricultural Unit have been measured by the CASA Service Centre. Prior to the establishment of the Agricul- tural Unit, the average time taken to process an AOC was 119 days for initial issue and 43 days for variations. Since the establishment of the Agricultural Unit, these processing times have been reduced to 39 days and 20 days respectively. (3) The Agricultural Unit Coordinator is supported by two Airworthiness Officers and two Flying Op- erations Officers. (4) The Agricultural Unit Coordinator is supported by two Airworthiness Officers and two Flying Op- erations Officers (5) The Agricultural Unit is not separately funded as the unit operates within the financial oversight of the Aviation Safety Compliance Division. As such, the costs associated are the Aviation Safety Compliance Division’s normal operating costs of staffing as agricultural functions are within CASA’s ordinary workload.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 157

(6) All projected costs are being considered within the overall 2005-06 CASA Budget context. (7) No scale back or closure of the Agricultural Unit is planned at this time. Therapeutic Goods Administration (Question No. 374) Senator Allison asked the Minister representing the Minister for Health and Ageing, upon notice, on 8 March 2005: (1) With reference to the 2004 Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) report into the regulation of non-prescription medicinal products which recommended that the Therapeutic Goods Administra- tion (TGA) arrange an independent assessment of recent key enforcement actions, such as the Pan Pharmaceutical recall; (a) what action, if any, has the Government initiated to arrange this inde- pendent assessment of recent key enforcement actions; (b) what is the timeframe for this independ- ent assessment; (c) what will be the terms of reference for the independent assessment; and (d) what will be the criteria for assessing if the group/organisation who undertake the assessment have the appropriate expertise in the area of complementary medicines. (2) Do the deficiencies identified in the ANAO report apply equally to the manufacture and supply of prescription drugs; if not, why not; if so: (a) what are the safety implications; and (b) how does the TGA know this. (3) In the past 2 years, how many pharmaceutical manufacturers has the TGA audited. (4) How many of these manufacturers have subsequently closed in the past 2 years. (5) From where are these products now being supplied. (6) If they are being imported: (a) what measures have been taken to ensure that manufacturers are better than those that have closed; and (b) are the imported products safe. (7) Has the Government investigated whether recent key enforcement actions, such as the Pan Phar- maceutical recall, are sending business offshore; if not, why not. (8) Has the Government examined the effect of recent key enforcement actions, such as the Pan Phar- maceutical recall, on international credibility and the export market for complementary medicines, especially in Asia; if not, why not. Senator Patterson—The Minister for Health and Ageing has provided the following an- swer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) (a) to (d) The Department of Health and Ageing has established an Audit Sub-Committee to over- see, and to report to the Secretary on, the implementation of all the ANAO recommendations. The Audit Sub-Committee has engaged a consultant to assist its work. The consultant will be required to: • assist the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) in implementing the ANAO recommenda- tions including development of an implementation strategy; • undertake a review of recent key enforcement actions to draw lessons for the future; and • review broader aspects of the TGA’s administration, management and governance structure and make recommendations where appropriate. The consultant commenced in April 2005, and the bulk of the work is expected to be completed by mid year. Through the selection process, the consultant demonstrated skills and experience commensurate with this important and significant task. The consultant brings to the engagement senior level and demonstrated experience in organisation change particularly in the context of a high profile organi-

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 158 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

sation such as the TGA. The consultant has provided the Department with a competitive price for the task. (2) The deficiencies identified by the ANAO related to non-prescription medicines as the scope of the audit was limited to complementary medicines and over-the-counter medicines. However, if there are improvements in regulation as a result of the recommendations that have application to the pre- scription medicines program, the opportunity will be taken to implement them concomitantly. (3) In the period 2003 and 2004, the TGA conducted 273 audits of manufacturers of medicines in Aus- tralia and overseas. (4) and (5) Of the Australian medicines manufacturing sites audited by the TGA in 2003 and 2004, two licences were revoked following requests from the manufacturers, and seven licences were suspended (six of which were at the request of the manufacturers). The two licence revocations were for testing laboratories, they did not supply medicinal products to the market. In cases where products were being manufactured and companies voluntarily suspended produc- tion, the impact on short-term supply cannot be determined. The products were mainly low risk or non-prescription medicines for which there were alternative sources of supply. (6) (a) and (b) Overseas manufacturers supplying products to Australia must meet an equivalent stan- dard of good manufacturing practice (GMP) as Australian manufacturers. Overseas manufacturers are audited by the TGA to the same Code of GMP as Australian manufacturers unless comparable GMP evidence of manufacture from an acceptable overseas regulator is submitted to the TGA for assessment. (7) and (8) Information on Australian manufacturers that may have transferred or intend to transfer their production offshore is not recorded on TGA information systems. The TGA does not require manufacturers to divulge their reasons for seeking voluntary revocation of their licences. The impact of the recent key enforcement actions will be examined by the consultant as outlined at Part 1 above. National Literacy and Numeracy Standards (Question No. 380) Senator Allison asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education, Science and Training, upon notice, on Tuesday, 8 March 2005: (1) What evidence is there to suggest that the current Year 3 national reading benchmark is too low. (2) Are there any plans to raise the standard of the current Year 3 national reading benchmark. (3) Will parents be informed of any changes to the national literacy test and the reasons for any changes. (4) What measures are being taken to ensure those students most in need of assistance with literacy will receive it through the Tutorial Voucher Initiative (TVI). (5) Was this issue examined before the TVI commenced. Senator Vanstone—The Minister for Education, Science and Training has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) The Australian Government supports the development of authoritative measures of the standard of literacy and numeracy achievement of all students. Parents require assurance that their child is achieving minimum acceptable literacy and numeracy standards. The development of the national literacy and numeracy benchmarks was realised through a coop- erative process involving all State and Territory school authorities, the Australian Government and

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 159

representatives of non-government schools. The development work was undertaken by Curriculum Corporation and informed by evidence such as levels of achievement as demonstrated in national surveys, State assessment programs and international data. The development process involved both technical expertise and extensive consultation. Those involved included all key school education authorities, academic experts in literacy and numeracy, educational testing experts, parent groups, teachers and teacher professional organisations. The national benchmarks that underpin the reporting of student achievement describe nationally agreed minimum acceptable standards for aspects of literacy and numeracy at particular year lev- els. That is, they represent the minimum acceptable standard of literacy and numeracy that a stu- dent must have at a particular year level in order for the student to continue to make progress at school. The benchmarks do not attempt to describe the whole range of literacy learning, nor the full range of what students are taught; nor do they try to describe the full range of student achievement. In- stead, they represent important and essential elements of literacy at a minimum acceptable level. (2) Education Ministers agreed in July 2003 to move towards enhanced reporting of literacy and nu- meracy achievement. In addition to reporting the percentage of students achieving national literacy and numeracy benchmarks this would enable to range of student achievement to be reported. On 30 November 2004 the Minister for Education, Science and Training, the Hon Dr Brendan Nel- son, MP, announced details about the Australian Government National Inquiry into the Teaching of Literacy. The Inquiry will be a broad, independent examination of reading research, teacher prepa- ration and practices for the teaching of literacy, particularly reading. One of the objectives of the Inquiry is to examine the effectiveness of assessment methods being used to monitor the progress of students’ early reading learning. A report of the Inquiry’s findings will be prepared in the second half of 2005. (3) State and Territory standardised tests are currently the basis of assessment against national bench- marks. Under MCEETYA arrangements, brochures are being developed for parents to inform them of the national assessment programme including literacy assessments. (4) The Tutorial Voucher Initiative is a pilot programme and hence eligibility is limited to a defined group of students – those who were below the Year 3 national reading benchmark in 2003. Parents of all students who fall into this category are eligible to apply for a Tutorial Voucher. The Initiative will be independently evaluated. Any decision to extend the Initiative to other groups of students will be a matter for future consideration by the Government. (5) National data available at the time the TVI commenced indicated that those students below the minimum national reading benchmark would be in most need of assistance in literacy. Tutorial Voucher Initiative (Question No. 384) Senator Allison asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education, Science and Training, upon notice, on 8 March 2005: (1) What is the estimated cost of the Tutorial Voucher Initiative (TVI) if it is continued in 2006, 2007 and 2008. (2) How much money has been committed to the TVI program to date. (3) After setting up the infrastructure, what happens if the program does not go ahead; and how much money will have been spent on setting up the TVI. (4) Will tutors be matched to students (for example, non-English speaking students being tutored by those who are fluent in the relevant language).

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 160 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

(5) Who has applied to be a broker. (6) What is the highest hourly rate a tutor has charged. (7) If state education departments are applying to be brokers, why do they not administer this funding. Senator Vanstone—The Minister for Education, Science and Training has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) The Tutorial Voucher Initiative is a pilot programme which is only to run in 2005, for students who were below the Year 3 national reading benchmark in 2003. Continuation of the pilot into other years would require decisions as to which groups of students would be eligible for the voucher in each year. $20.3 million has been committed to deliver the Initiative to one year’s cohort of stu- dents who were below the Year 3 national reading benchmark and this amount could be extrapo- lated to future years. A more accurate estimate for each future year would depend on the number of eligible students. (2) $20.3 million has been committed to the pilot Tutorial Voucher Initiative. (3) The TVI was established as a pilot, and as such minimal infrastructure has been set up. The De- partment has spent in the order of $200,000 on the Tutorial Voucher Initiative Information Man- agement System, which could be extended should the pilot continue. (4) Brokers will make every effort to provide a choice of suitable tutors for each eligible child. (5) The brokers which have been announced are as follows: Western Australia – Group Training Australia (WA) Victoria – Progressive Learning Queensland – Progressive Learning South Australia – SA Department of Education and Children’s Services, working with the Catholic Education Commission of SA and the Association of Independent Schools SA ACT – Dr Pauline Griffiths NSW – NSW Department of Education and Training Tasmania (non-government schools) – Association of Independent Schools Tasmania. The Department is negotiating with brokers in the Northern Territory and for state schools in Tas- mania. The Tasmanian Government has recently agreed to release the relevant results to parents and hence children in state schools in Tasmania will now participate. (6) Brokers have tended thus far to establish a set hourly rate for their State/Territory. At this stage most brokers are providing between 10 and 15 hours of tuition. (7) Brokers for the Tutorial Voucher Initiative were selected through an open tender process. State and Territory departments were eligible to apply and some have chosen this approach. The pilot Tuto- rial Voucher Initiative is a national Initiative of the Australian Government, and hence is adminis- tered through the Department of Education, Science and Training. Hysterectomies (Question No. 386) Senator Allison asked the Minister representing the Minister for Health and Ageing, upon notice, on 9 March 2005: With reference to the July 2004 report published by the Australian Council for Safety and Quality in Health Care and the National Institute of Clinical Studies titled Charting the safety and quality of health care in Australia:

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 161

(1) Is the Government aware that this report identified that one in five Australian women will undergo a hysterectomy by the age of 50. (2) What information is available on how this rate compares with other developed countries. (3) How is the Government examining the appropriate rate of hysterectomies. (4) What information does the Government have on the factors that contribute to the need for hysterec- tomies. (5) Is the Government monitoring whether hysterectomies are being used appropriately. (6) Is the Government aware that this report also identified that there are substantial differences in the rates of hysterectomies according to socioeconomic status and whether a woman lived in a metro- politan, rural or regional location, with higher hysterectomy rates experienced by women in lower socioeconomic areas and regional areas. (7) How is the Government investigating this variation in the use of hysterectomies. Senator Patterson—The Minister for Health and Ageing has provided the following an- swer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) Yes. (2) There is no routinely published international comparative data. (3) Individual decisions concerning the appropriateness of a woman undergoing a hysterectomy are made between a patient and her medical practitioner. (4) The Government does not specifically collect data on the clinical or socioeconomic factors that contribute to the need for medical procedures, including hysterectomies. However, the medical lit- erature contains a number of papers that seek to explain reasons underpinning the need for hyster- ectomies. For example: Beckmann K., Iosifidis P., Shorne L., Gilchrist S., and Roder D., Effects of variations in hysterec- tomy status on population coverage by cervical screening. Aust NZ J Public Health. 2003 Oct;27(5):507-12. Byles J.E., Mishra G., and Schofield M., Factors associated with hysterectomy among women in Australia. Health Place. 2000 Dec 6(4):301-8. Graham M., Keleher H., James E., and Byles J., 2001. Factors influencing women’s decision- making about hysterectomy. Women’s health politics, action and renewal: 4th Australian Women’s Health Conference. (5) No. (6) Yes. The analysis by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, from the National Hospital Morbidity Data Collection, highlights a number of differences in both geographical and socioeco- nomic factors and the rates of hysterectomies performed in Australia, indicating that there may be factors other than clinical factors that influence whether a woman is likely to have a hysterectomy. (7) The Australian Government is not investigating variations in the use of hysterectomies. Australian Broadcasting Corporation (Question No. 388) Senator Brown asked the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, upon notice, on 9 March 2005: With reference to the refusal by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) for filmmaker Judy Rymer to use archival footage in a documentary program ‘Punished not Protected’:

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 162 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

(1) Are the guidelines used by ABC Enterprises in determining whether to licence other parties to use ABC content publicly available; if not, will the Minister ask the ABC to publish the guidelines on its website. (2) Do documentary film-makers, whether or not they are promoting a particular cause, have the same entitlement as anyone else to use ABC content that is part of the public record; if not, will the Gov- ernment require the ABC to remove any such discrimination from its guidelines and procedures. (3) Is the Minister legally entitled to direct the ABC with respect to the principles that it applies to the licensing of the use of ABC content. Senator Coonan—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: The ABC has provided the following information: (1) The terms and conditions relating to the licensing and supplying of ABC program material to ex- ternal third parties are publicly available and are published on the ABC Content Sales website at the following address - http://www.abccontentsales.com.au/librarysales/ratecard.htm. The underly- ing principles relating to the licensing of ABC program material are published in the ABC Editorial Policies under section 5.6 “Further Use of ABC Program Material.” (2) The terms and conditions relating to the licensing and supplying of ABC program material apply to all external third parties, including program or documentary makers or other clients. In line with ABC Editorial Policies, the overarching consideration is not the occupation or political affiliation of the client but the intended purpose of the program material and the need to protect the editorial integrity of the ABC and its reputation as an impartial and independent broadcaster. (3) No. Visas (Question No. 389) Senator Brown asked the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Af- fairs, upon notice, on 8 March 2005: With respect to the media release VPS 122/2004 by the Minister on 24 August 2004 headed ‘New TPV Measurers to Commence on 27 August 2004’: (1) Since that announcement: (a) how many Temporary Protection Visa (TPV) holders and Temporary Humanitarian Visa (THV) holders have applied for mainstream migration visas; (b) how many such applications have been successful; (c) how many such applications have been rejected; and (d) how many such applications are still under consideration. (2) What is the average time taken to determine such an application. (3) How does this time compare with that taken to process migration visas from other than TPV or THV holders. Senator Vanstone—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) (a) to (d) As expected, only small numbers of temporary protection visa holders and offshore tem- porary humanitarian visa holders are applying for mainstream visas so far. Most of these people are awaiting the outcome of their further protection visa applications as this offers the prospect of obtaining permanent residence and access to attractive settlement services and welfare support if needed. As at 25 February 2005, 20 applications for mainstream visas have been lodged (covering 35 peo- ple). 8 applications (18 people) have been finalised with 15 permanent visas granted, 1 temporary visa granted and 1 application (covering 2 people) withdrawn as the applicants were granted per- manent protection visas.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 163

The visas granted are: 12 Subclass 856 Employer Nomination Scheme (Permanent) visas 1 Subclass 801 Spouse (Permanent) visa 2 Subclass 857 Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme (Permanent) visas 1 Subclass 422 Medical Practitioner (Temporary) visa (2) The average time taken to finalise applications from TPV/THV holders applying for mainstream skilled employer sponsored visas has been from two to three months. (3) The time taken to process any visa application will vary according to the criteria needed to be satis- fied and the number and type of standard checks required eg health and character checks which vary according to the background and circumstances of the visa applicant and their dependants. To date the processing time experienced by TPV/THV holders is on a par with the median processing time of onshore applications lodged under the same programs from non TPV/THV holders. Protection Visa Applicants (Question No. 391) Senator Bartlett asked the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Af- fairs, upon notice, on 8 March 2005: (1) What number or percentage of non-detained protection visa applicants have been refused the right to work and access to Medicare in the past 12 months, as a result of the 45 day application limit. (2) Why was the arbitrary number of ‘45 days’ introduced in the 1997-98 financial year. (3) (a) Why is this the cut-off point for eligibility for healthcare and potential income; and (b) what is the intended outcome in limiting the application time to 45 days. (4) (a) How many individual applications are before the Minister under section 417; and (b) are all members of this group denied the right to work or access to Medicare assistance. (5) What percentage of this group was previously eligible for the federally-funded Asylum Seeker As- sistance Scheme program (for health, torture or other reasons). (6) With reference to the Government’s recent policy that all protection visa applicants undertake health checks within a set time of seeking asylum, as opposed to at the end of the determination process, as previously practiced: (a) what does the Government intend to do with this information; and (b) will applicants be notified of the results of the health checks. (7) As many applicants are denied access to Medicare or any government health care scheme, what does the government intend to do if the checks reveal a major health concern, either for the appli- cant or the community. (8) What is the Government’s duty of care for the health needs of those individuals awaiting an out- come on their refugee claim. Senator Vanstone—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) The Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (DIMIA) systems do not provide reliable data on whether Protection Visa (PV) applicants hold visas without work rights or access to Medicare as a result of applying for PV more than 45 days after arrival in Australia. However, DIMIA systems as at 28 February 2005 indicate that, some 35 percent of PV applications lodged in the period 1 July 2003 to 28 February 2005 by clients with a Movements Database match, were lodged more than 45 days after date of last arrival. (2) Generally, genuine asylum seekers apply for a PV soon after arrival. A 45-day period provides genuine asylum seekers with sufficient time to obtain information about the PV process and to ac- cess, should they wish, legal or migration assistance to complete their applications.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 164 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

(3) (a) The current migration legislation provides work rights and access to Medicare for those per- sons who have not been in Australia for more than 45 days in the 12 months before the date of their PV application. This requirement was introduced in July 1997 to encourage timely lodgement of asylum claims following a person’s arrival. (b) This arrangement was introduced as part of a package of measures aimed at minimising incen- tives for misuse of the onshore protection process by applicants in the community. Some peo- ple were lodging protection visa applications only after protracted periods in Australia or after compliance contact. (4) (a) As at 31 January 2005, there were 1338 on hand requests for intervention under section 417. Of these, 911 cases were being assessed by the Department and 427 cases were being consid- ered by the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs or Minister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs. It should be noted that there is no application for Ministerial intervention under section 417. The section 417 intervention power is not compellable and the Minister does not have an obli- gation to consider substituting a more favourable decision in a case. (b) No. Where an individual holds a Bridging Visa E granted on the basis that the Minister is considering the exercise of his or her public interest power in the case, they may be eligible for permission to work if they can demonstrate a “compelling need to work”. (5) Statistical reports on this issue are not available from Departmental systems. (6) (a) It is a long standing criterion for grant of a protection visa that the applicant undertakes the health check. Unlike other visa applicants, protection visa applicants do not need to pass the health check but merely to undertake it. The examination is for the detection of conditions that require treatment, particularly if the condition is one that may pose a public health risk, such as active pulmonary tuberculosis. (b) Notification of the summary outcome passes first to DIMIA, and not routinely to applicants except as part of the general information about progress on the case. Where there are condi- tions that require attention, a patient will be referred appropriately and with full counselling and knowledge about the situation. Records are held for subsequent use, available for use by health practitioners. Copies of completed examinations reports are available to applicants un- der FOI but do not generally record whether the results indicate final meeting or failing of the health criteria. They are simply records of the observations, measurements and tests under- taken. (7) Those protection visa applicants who do not have access to Medicare can access the Asylum Seeker Assistance Scheme and related health care subject to the usual eligibility criteria. All tem- porary entrants to Australia are urged to carry adequate health insurance for their stay, and many will have shown evidence of that before being issued with their visas. Notwithstanding insurance, treatment and containment of public health risk conditions such as tuberculosis, which may affect the community, is provided free of charge to all patients whether or not Medicare eligible. Pay- ment for immediate and necessary care for any Medicare eligible persons is a matter for negotia- tion with the admitting hospital. (8) The Government ensures that the health needs of PV applicants are met. Asylum seekers in the community, who have been in Australia for less than 45 days in the twelve months before the date of application for a protection visa, are eligible for a bridging visa with work rights, and access to Medicare, until their application is finally determined. Current figures indicate some 65% of asylum seekers in the community apply within this period. The bridging visa provides them with lawful status and permission to remain in Australia during the processing of their application for a PV.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 165

Financial assistance is also available to PV applicants who are unable to meet their most basic needs for food, accommodation and health through the Asylum Seeker Assistance Scheme pro- vided they meet the eligibility criteria. The scheme is administered by the Red Cross through a contract with DIMIA. There is no enforceable duty of care in relation to the health needs of people in the community applying for protection. However, the Government owes a general duty of care to applicants who are in detention, and that duty extends to providing appropriately for detainees’ health needs. There are general international obligations to provide appropriate health care for people in Austra- lia. Australia’s arrangements, in particular through provision of either Medicare access or the availability of the Asylum Seekers Assistance (ASA) health care arrangements to eligible appli- cants, meet those obligations. Goods and Services (Question Nos 393 to 423) Senator O’Brien asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister and other ministers, upon notice, on 9 March 2005: (1) For each of the financial years 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05 to date, what is the type and value of goods and services procured from regional Australia by the department and agencies for which the Minister is responsible. (2) If the Minister cannot identify the type and value of goods and services procured from regional Australia, why not. Senator Hill—The Prime Minister has provided the following answer on behalf of all min- isters to the honourable senator’s question: For each of the financial years referred to, Australian Government policy required agencies that are subject to the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 to report all contracts and agency agreements, including standing offers, with an estimated liability (including GST where applicable) of $2,000 or more ($10,000 or more since 1 January 2005) in the Gazette Publishing System (GaPS - now called AusTender). The information recorded in AusTender includes a short description of each con- tract, the value of the contract, the identity of the provider of the goods or services, and the postcode of the provider of the goods and services. In large part, therefore, the information sought by the honour- able senator is already publicly available, and I am not prepared to authorise the significant diversion of resources that would be required to provide a more comprehensive response. Asylum Seekers (Question No. 424) Senator Kirk asked the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Af- fairs, upon notice, on 9 March 2005: (1) How many Iranian nationals are currently detained in Baxter Detention Centre and of those: (a) how many have agreed to be voluntarily repatriated; and (b) how many are awaiting repatriation. (2) For the period 3 March 1996 to 15 March 2005, how many failed asylum seekers have been repa- triated to Iran and can the Minister specify: (a) the number of people who volunteered to be repa- triated; and (b) the number of people who were involuntarily repatriated for each of the periods: (i) 3 March 1996 to 31 December 1996, (ii) each of the calendar years 1997 to 2004 inclusive, and (iii) 1 January 2005 to 15 March 2005. (3) What assurances has the Australian Government obtained from Iran that any person returned invol- untarily will not be incarcerated, tortured, killed or mistreated in any way.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 166 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

(4) Does Australia currently have a Memorandum of Understanding with the Government of Iran to accept both voluntary and involuntary repatriation of failed asylum seekers. (5) Given the article in the Australian Financial Review by Julie Macken, dated 28 May 2003, which contained reports of failed asylum seekers forcibly returned to Iran in 2001, and who, according to their families, were never seen again, what action has the Government taken with respect to the claims contained within this article. (6) For the period 3 March 1996 to 15 March 2005, have other claims of disappearance or incarcera- tion of repatriated Iranians been brought to the attention of the Government; if so, how many claims have been received and in respect of each claim: (a) how many individuals were concerned, and (b) what action or investigations were undertaken by the Government. (7) Does the Government monitor the safety and whereabouts of failed asylum seekers after they have been repatriated from Australia to Iran. Senator Vanstone—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) (a) to (b)There are 56 Iranian detainees in Baxter as at 15 March 2005. There are presently no Ira- nian detainees who have agreed to voluntarily return. (2) (a) Since June 2000 there have been 227 Iranians voluntarily repatriated. (b) The MOU with the Iranian Government was signed in March 2003. There were two involun- tary repatriations in 2003, three in 2004 and there has been two to 15 March 2005. The statistics requested for earlier periods are not readily available and their compilation would require an unreasonable diversion of departmental resources. (3) The Australian Government has not sought such assurances. The most effective way to ensure that persons do not suffer persecution if returned to their homeland is to have a robust process to iden- tify refugees and protect them so that they are not returned. Australia has such a process which in- cludes access to merits review by an independent tribunal of any unsuccessful protection claim. Applicants who are unsuccessful at the tribunal level have access to judicial review by the courts. Their cases are closely and regularly monitored to identify any instances in which the Ministerial intervention powers may be appropriately used to either to allow a fresh protection visa application to be lodged or to grant a visa on non refugee grounds. The persons returned have been conclu- sively found not to face any well founded fear of persecution. (4) Yes. (5) The Department has been unable to identify any information to confirm the origins of the reports or to substantiate them. (6) (a) Departmental systems are unable to report on this matter. (b) Departmental systems are unable to report on this matter. (7) No. Migration Agent or Exempted Agent Form (Question No. 425) Senator Brown asked the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Af- fairs, upon notice, on 9 March 2005: With reference to departmental Form 956 ‘Appointment of a migration agent or exempted agent’, which replaced the previous Form 956 ‘Authorisation of a person to act and receive communication’: was the new form developed in consultation with representatives of migration agents. Senator Vanstone—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows:

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 167

The Form 956 Appointment of a migration agent or exempted agent was developed by my Department to address confusion about the role of an “authorised recipient”, as opposed to that of a registered mi- gration agent. The change simply split the Form 956 Authorisation of a person to act and receive communication into two forms - Form 956 Appointment of a migration agent or exempted agent and Form 1231 Appoint- ment of authorised recipient. This did not affect registered migration agents. My Department, however, wrote to all agents in May 2003, advising them of the change, prior to the introduction of the revised form on 1 July 2003. Migration Agent or Exempted Agent Form (Question No. 426) Senator Brown asked the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Af- fairs, upon notice, on 9 March 2005: With reference to departmental Form 956 ‘Appointment of a migration agent or exempted agent’, which replaced the previous Form 956 ‘Authorisation of a person to act and receive communication’: (1) Does Form 956 properly address the situation where there are multiple applicants who do not have the same answer to question 4 or question 9 on the form. (2) Given the limited space on Form 956 for entering details required in response to question 4, will the department accept attachments which provide the required information. (3) If, in answer to question 4, the applicant permits the agent to receive all communications, why is it necessary to give details of the most recent visa application, rather than accessing that information from the department’s own files. (4) Why does question 9 on the form relate only to exempted agents. Senator Vanstone—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) Multiple visa applicants attached to the one visa application are generally represented by the same migration agent. Applicants not using the same agent, or who wish to provide the same agent with a more limited authorisation to act for them, must fill out a separate 956 or simply advise the De- partment in writing. A revised version of the Form 956, which will be available from 1 July 2005, contains specific advice on this point to clarify this situation. (2) Yes. (3) Details of the applicant’s most recent visa application are requested for the sake of clarity and to help ensure that all applications are accounted for. This seeks to particularly address situations where applicants have multiple applications involving more than one migration agent. (4) Question 9 relates to exempted agents only, as it is the Department’s view that registered migration agents, as professionals, should receive all relevant documentation about their clients to ensure that they provide proper representation. This view was developed in consultation with the Migration In- stitute of Australia. Where an applicant has, however, appointed an exempted agent, such as a close family member, to assist them with their application, it is clear from previous experience that they may not wish them to receive sensitive health and character information and accordingly, my Department gives them an option to receive such information directly.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 168 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Migration Agent or Exempted Agent Form (Question No. 427) Senator Brown asked the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Af- fairs, upon notice, on 9 March 2005: With reference to departmental Form 956 ‘Appointment of a migration agent or exempted agent’, which replaced the previous Form 956 ‘Authorisation of a person to act and receive communication’: Do per- sons wishing to end the appointment of a migration agent or exempted agent need to use Form 956 and (b) previously, was it possible to simply write an advisory letter to the department. Senator Vanstone—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: Persons wishing to end the appointment of a migration agent, or an exempted agent, can complete a Form 956 or simply advise the Department in writing (as they could previously). Migration Agent or Exempted Agent Form (Question No. 428) Senator Brown asked the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Af- fairs, upon notice, on 9 March 2005: With reference to departmental Form 956 ‘Appointment of a migration agent or exempted agent’, which replaced the previous Form 956 ‘Authorisation of a person to act and receive communication’: (1) How many individuals or organisations have written to the department complaining about the de- sign of Form 956. (2) Is there any work in progress to streamline or improve new Form 956; if, so, will migration agents be able to continue to use the existing form until stocks are depleted. Senator Vanstone—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) A few concerns with the design of the Form 956 have been raised with my Department over the years. My Department has tried to address these concerns when amending the form. (2) Work is under way to improve the Form 956 Appointment of a migration agent or exempted agent and a new version will be available from July 2005. This is proceeding in consultation with the Migration Institute of Australia. This will not affect the use of existing stocks. SIEV X (Question No. 431) Senator Brown asked the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Af- fairs, upon notice, on 10 March 2005: With reference to the sinking of the boat known as SIEV X: (1) Will the Minister now release the list of names of people who are thought to have drowned. (2) How many queries has the Government had from people seeking the names of persons thought to have been on board: (a) from within Australia and (b) from outside Australia. (3) If the list is not to be released: (a) what are the precise reasons; and (b) if one reason is that release of the list would endanger an informant, in what way. Senator Vanstone—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) The Government has no way of knowing or verifying all those who drowned, being an illegal ven- ture out of another country with the tragedy occurring in international waters. Some names of those who have thought to have drowned are held. (2) Records of requests are not held.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 169

(3) The Government does not hold comprehensive information nor is it in a position to verify it. Beryllium (Question No. 446) Senator Bartlett asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 10 March 2005: (1) In relation to beryllium exposure by Australian Defence Force (ADF) personnel and veterans, is testing for exposure conducted by urine test or blood test. (2) Does the department believe that a urine test is sufficient to determine exposure to beryllium, par- ticularly in people who have had chronic low dose exposures some years ago, and whether any po- tential risk is posed. (3) Will the department insist on blood tests to determine whether, with past exposure to beryllium- containing dusts, these people have become ‘sensitised’ to beryllium. (4) Does the department intend to conduct any medical research into beryllium and the effects on ex- posure by veterans. (5) Which veterans, or serving personnel, is the department contacting in relation to their possible ex- posure to beryllium, and how is this contact being made. Senator Hill—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) All claims by former or serving Defence personnel are being appropriately dealt with by the De- partment of Veterans’ Affairs. (2) (3) and (4) Refer to answer (1). (5) The action taken so far to contact those who may have been exposed has included: (a) three media releases on the issue of possible beryllium-related exposure; (b) the establishment of the Beryllium Information Service, telephone number 1800 000 644; (c) posting comprehensive information about beryllium-related exposure on Defence and De- partment of Veterans’ Affairs websites; and (d) articles in the single service newspapers. Defence plans to contact those people who have registered with the Beryllium Information Service. Iraq (Question No. 458) Senator Nettle asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 30 March 2005: With reference to depleted uranium contamination in Iraq: (1) Has the department reviewed the medical literature and other reports that establish the existence of widespread depleted uranium contamination in Iraq. (2) Specifically, has the department reviewed the reports of medical studies conducted by the Uranium Medical Research Centre and the Institute for Mineralogy, JW Goethe University, which identified uranium exposure consistent with depleted uranium among members of the United States Military Police unit 442 deployed in Samawah, Iraq. (3) What conclusions has the department drawn from these reviews. (4) Has the department consulted with the Dutch Defence Ministry regarding the dangers of depleted uranium in the area. (5) Were Dutch troops forced to move the location of their camp, due to high levels of radiation. (6) Has the depleted uranium and equipment exposed to radiation been removed from Camp Smitty.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 170 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

(7) Will the Australian Defence Force (ADF) follow the Japanese practice and issue its members de- ployed in Al Muthanna with personal dosimeters, to measure radiation exposure. (8) What training and information has been provided to ADF members to avoid exposure to depleted uranium while in Iraq. (9) What liability will the department have if any ADF personnel are found to be exposed to radiation from depleted uranium in Al Muthanna. Senator Hill—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) Yes. (2) Yes. (3) This report is an abstract of a paper that was presented to the 33rd Annual Meeting of the European Society of Radiation Biology in Budapest, Hungary in August 2004. The abstract does not contain enough information on the study method and analysis for Defence to provide a definitive opinion. (4) Defence has not directly consulted with the Dutch Defence Ministry, but consulted with the Coali- tion’s regional command for the area in Iraq and with the United Kingdom Ministry for Defence, which is the lead nation for this area. (5) No. (6) There has been no reported evidence of depleted uranium or equipment exposed to radiation within Camp Smitty. (7) The Australian Defence Force (ADF) Hazard Assessment Team will wear personal dosimeters, and will examine the environmental and operational hazards to determine if, and when, other ADF per- sonnel will need dosimeters. (8) All personnel deploying on Operation Catalyst are provided with a brief that details the known environmental and occupational threats present within the Middle Eastern Area of Operations. This brief covers the presence of depleted uranium in the Middle Eastern Area of Operations and what ADF personnel must do to avoid exposure. (9) This question should be directed to the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs. Infrastructure Borrowings (Question No. 460) Senator Harris asked the Minister for Revenue and Assistant Treasurer, upon notice, on 16 March 2005: (1) Did the Commissioner of Taxation on 6 October 1994 issue tax determination 94/80 on infrastruc- ture bonds which had the status of a public ruling. (2) Given that the minority report of the Economics References Committee refers to retail investors in infrastructure bonds borrowing to lend, in total, multiples of the funds sought by the constructor, what were the actual multiples in: (a) the Commonwealth Bank of Australia’s (CBA) ‘Develop Australia Bonds’, with an offering memorandum of 23 April 1996; and (b) Legal and General’s ‘In- frastructure Funds 1996-2 and 1996-3’. (3) Can the Minister confirm that for a cash payment of $17 000, Legal and General’s memorandum indicated that a tax refund of $20 370 should be available, and that the CBA indicated that a cash payment of $70 048 should result in a tax refund of $80 048. (4) Can the Minister confirm that Price Waterhouse indicated on 27 May 1996 that the Legal and Gen- eral financing facility would be ‘non-recourse’ to the investor. (5) Can the Minister confirm that the Commissioner of Taxation, Mr Carmody, made the following statement to the Taxation Institute on 19 March 1997: In the absence of any unusual arrangements

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 171

surrounding the cited situations [including infrastructure bonds] there is no reason to suggest that Part IVA would apply, having regard to the factors in section 177D. Clearly, it would be incongru- ous for Part IVA to apply across the board to deny access to specific features of the tax system; nor does the Spotless decision suggest this is the case. In broad terms the Spotless decision turned not so much on the availability of the section 23(q) exemption as the analysis of the surrounding facts which lead to a conclusion that the arrangements were contrived to achieve the benefit of that ex- emption. So regard must be had to the wider context. For example, in the case of indirect infra- structure bonds at the retail level we will have regard to the whole financing structure including the direct infrastructure bond financing, the rate of interest relative to current market rates, any risk to the investor including whether they are locked in by options, the return on an after tax basis and how the funding took place including all other relevant matters. (6) Can the Minister confirm that tax determination 94/80 provides: The extent to which interest paid by an investor on a loan used for the full purchase price of infrastructure borrowings will be tax deductible depends on an investors’ particular circumstances. In order for the interest to be de- ductible the investor must have entered into the loan solely for the purpose of funding the invest- ment in or acquisition of the infrastructure borrowings. On indicator that the investor had a purpose other than, or in addition to, funding the infrastructure borrowings, would be where the deductions in relation to the infrastructure borrowings are greater than the exempt return on the infrastructure borrowings grossed up by the investor’s marginal tax rate as it would be but for the infrastructure borrowing investment and any related income and deductions. (7) With reference to the ‘smell test’ advanced by the Commissioner on 19 March 1997, as well as the criteria of non-recourse loan, large upfront deductibles prior to 30 June, tax refund exceeding cash contribution, fraction of the borrowings going into the underlying business, and option to partici- pate only for year one, can the Minister confirm: (a) whether the Commissioner viewed the CBA and Legal and General offerings as contrived; and (b) whether the dominant purpose of the pro- moter was other than to offer a tax benefit to the investor. (8) Were these retail infrastructure bond investments referred to the Part IVA Panel, and if so how did it view them in the light of the warning in tax determination 94/80, and what was the result of its deliberations. Senator Coonan—As this question deals with matters of taxation administration, I asked the Commissioner of Taxation for advice: (1) Yes. The ATO confirmed that Taxation Determination TD 94/80 issued on 6 October 1994. (2) The Commissioner advises me that it is inconsistent with his responsibilities under the secrecy provisions of the tax law to provide specific taxpayer details. (3) The Commissioner advises me that he is unable to confirm the wording in a company’s memoran- dum. (4) The Commissioner advises me that he is not in a position to confirm whether advice was provided by a private firm. (5) Yes. Mr Carmody, made the statement as part of a presentation at the 13th National Convention of the Taxation Institute of Australia on 19 March 1997. (6) Yes. The ATO confirmed that the wording in this question is contained in paragraph 2 of Taxation Determination TD 94/80. (7) The Commissioner advises me that it is inconsistent with his responsibilities under the secrecy provisions of the tax law to provide specific taxpayer details. (8) The Commissioner advises me that the Part IVA Panel was not established at that time.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 172 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Defence: Australian Remains (Question No. 464) Senator Mark Bishop asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 16 March 2005: (1) Can the minister confirm when the four sets of remains were found at Merris in Northern France. (2) Who was responsible for researching: (a) the retrieval/burial site; and (b) the identity of the re- mains. (3) How many Australian Defence Force (ADF) personnel, or other Defence personnel, attended the site or travelled to France and on what occasions. (4) What was the cost of (a) travel to France; (b) the time of other personnel in Australia and Europe; (c) DNA testing; (d) attendance of relatives at the funeral ceremony; and (e) attendance of ADF and other personnel at the funeral. (5) Who was formally invited to attend the funerals of each of the four bodies found, and when were the funerals conducted. (6) Why did efforts to identify two of the bodies fail. (7) What assistance was provided by the Commonwealth War Graves Commission, and what costs, if any, were incurred by its involvement. (8) In each of the past 10 years: (a) how many reports have there been of uncovered Australian remains at Gallipoli; (b) how many of those reports were investigated on site; (c) by whom; and (d) with what outcome. (9) In each of the past five years: (a) how many other remains of Australians missing in action over- seas have been recovered (with the exception of Gallipoli); (b) from what locations; and (c) what were the estimated cost on each occasion, itemised in similar terms to the information provided in answer to parts (3) and (5) above. (10) In compiling the answer to this question, were the Australian War Memorial, the Office of Austra- lian War Graves and the Department of Veterans’ Affairs consulted and their assistance sought; if not, why not. Senator Hill—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) March 2003. (2) (a) Commonwealth War Graves Commission (CWGC). (b) Office of Australian War Graves. (3) Nil. CWGC attended the site. (4) (a) Nil. (b) Historical research $8072.68 including GST. (c) Nil. (d) $14,600 (estimate). (e) $39,700 (estimate). (5) French Chief of Army, French Department of Veterans’ Affairs, CWGC, Mayors of Communes of Merris and Bailleul. 22 April 2005. (6) Historical research and forensic examination was unable to determine identities with reasonable certainty. (7) Recovery of remains, report on recovery, historical information, provision of sites in a CWGC war cemetery for interment, and assistance with burial. Nil cost.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 173

(8) (a) No remains identified as Australian have been recovered at Gallipoli. (b) (c) and (d) Not applicable. (9) 2000 - Beaufighter A19-97: (a) Two flying officers. (b) Near the village of Gani, south of Kokopo, New Britain. (c) Four Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) personnel were involved in the recovery exercise. The cost of the recovery was approximately $23,600. Formal invitations to the funeral were extended to relatives and a friend of the deceased. The cost of attendance was approximately $8,000. The funeral was conducted at the Bita Paka War Cemetery, Rabaul Papua New Guinea on 15 November 2000. 2000/2001 - Beaufort Bomber A9-217 (a) Four flying officers. (b) Off Kawa Island, west of the Trobriand Island group. (c) Four Australian Defence Force (ADF) personnel were involved in the initial reconnaissance of the site. Seven personnel were involved in the first attempt and six in the second recovery ex- ercise. An underwater archaeologist from the Museum of North Queensland also participated in the second exercise. The cost of the recovery was approximately $100,000. Formal invitations to the funeral were extended to relatives and a friend of the deceased. The cost of attendance was approximately $9,200. The funeral was conducted at the Bita Paka War Cemetery, Rabaul Papua New Guinea on 2 May 2001. 2002 – Royal Air Force (RAF) Lancaster JB659 (a) Two flying officers. (b) Port of Amsterdam. (c) No ADF personnel were involved in the recovery and the ADF incurred no recovery costs. Formal invitations to the funeral were extended to relatives of the deceased. The cost of atten- dance was paid for by the RAF. The funeral was conducted at the Zwanenburg General Cemetery, Haarlemmermeer, Amster- dam on 29 November 2002. 2003 - RAAF Lancaster ED867 (a) The remains of aircrew were recovered from a Lancaster crash site north of Berlin in 1999. These remains were buried in the Berlin War Cemetery in 2000 as unknown RAF aircrew. Subsequent investigation by a family member determined that the wreckage was a RAAF Lancaster ED867. This aircraft was shot down near Berlin on 29 January 1944 with the loss of all crew. The remains of one crew member was recovered at the time by German authori- ties and subsequently buried in the Berlin War Cemetery after the war. The remains buried in 2000 were exhumed and examined by Luftwaffe forensic experts. No defini- tive forensic identification of the remains of the six missing crew were possible. Agreement was reached in January 2003 with the RAF and Commonwealth War Graves Commission to re-inter the remains in a collective grave, but with individual headstones. (b) North of Berlin. (c) ADF personnel were not involved in the recovery and the ADF incurred no recovery costs.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 174 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Formal invitations to the funeral were extended to relatives of the deceased. The cost of attendance was approximately $50,000. The funeral was conducted at the Berlin War Cemetery on 15 July 2003. 2004 - RAAF Lancaster PB290 (a) Four flying officers. (b) Near the town of Giessen, north of Frankfurt. (c) The ADF incurred no recovery costs. Forensic examination is still in progress. (10) Yes. Tasmania: Proposed Pulp Mill (Question No. 470) Senator Brown asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 17 March 2005: (1) From January 2002 to date, what communications have there been between the Minister, the Minis- ter’s staff or department and Gunns Ltd relating to the proposed pulp mill, and in each case: (a) what was the date of the communication; (b) what was the nature of the communication; (c) who was involved in the communication; and (d) what was the purpose and content of the communication. (2) (a) What conditions apply to the Government’s offer of $5 million assistance for the pulp mill; and (b) when is the money likely to be made available. Senator Minchin—The Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) On 5 April 2005 I received a letter (dated 21 March 2005) from the Executive Chairman of Gunns Ltd. The letter contained information about a new pulp mill being proposed by Gunns Ltd, and was accompanied by an information kit containing fact sheets about the proposed pulp mill. From January 2002 to date, my Department has not had any other communications with Gunns Ltd regarding a proposed pulp mill. (2) (a) The Prime Minister announced on 29 June 2004 that the Australian Government was prepared to consider contributing up to $5 million to assist with project costs, conditional upon the feasibil- ity study commissioned by Gunns Limited concluding that an environmental best practice pulp mill is economically viable. (b) No decision has been made as to when this money is likely to be made available. Tasmania: Proposed Pulp Mill (Question No. 474) Senator Brown asked the Special Minister of State, upon notice, on 17 March 2005: With reference to Gunns’ proposed pulp mill at Bell Bay in Tasmania: (1) From January 2002 to date, what communications have there been between the Minister, the Minis- ter’s staff or department and Gunns Ltd relating to the proposed pulp mill, and in each case: (a) what was the date of the communication; (b) what was the nature of the communication; (c) who was involved in the communication; and (d) what was the purpose and content of the communica- tion. (2) (a) What conditions apply to the Government’s offer of $5 million assistance for the pulp mill; and (b) when is the money likely to be made available.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 175

Senator Abetz—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) I have had no dealings with Gunns Ltd in my capacity as Special Minister of State. (2) This is not my portfolio area. Universities (Question No. 478) Senator Stott Despoja asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education, Science and Training, upon notice, on 23 March 2005: (a) How do current requirements for university reporting to the department differ from previous re- quirements under ‘Backing Australia’s Future’; and (b) Can a list be provided of all reporting requirements for universities under each regime, including an estimate of the number of hours required by university personnel to meet those requirements. Senator Vanstone—The Minister for Education, Science and Training has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (a) The Australian Government’s data and information collection is driven by its accountability re- sponsibilities for implementing and managing Government policies and programmes. Reporting requirements under Backing Australia’s Future are for the purpose of proper management and ac- countability of public funding provided under programmes legislated in the Higher Education Sup- port Act 2003. (b) Attached is a document listing the requirements for reporting to the Department in 2003 (prior to the introduction of Backing Australia’s Future) and in 2005 (current requirements). The Department does not collect data on the time taken by personnel in higher education providers to meet reporting requirements.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 176 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS ON HIGHER EDUCATION PROVIDERS – PRE AND POST BACKING AUSTRALIA’S FUTURE 2003 REPORTING REQUIREMENTS (PRE BACKING AUSTRALIA’S FUTURE) REPORTING APPLICABLE TO ELEMENT DESCRIPTION COMMENT REQUIREMENT WHICH PROVIDERS Student Collection Table A and B institu- Academic Organisational 4 data elements. Information on units of study formed by tions under the Higher Unit (AOU) File an institution to undertake as their primary objective teach- Education Funding Act ing only, research only or teaching-and-research functions, 1988 or which is used for statistical reporting purposes. Such units are referred to by various names, such as “schools” and “departments”. Course (CO) file 12 data elements. Information in respect of a particular reference year for all courses being offered by the institu- tion. Enrolment (EN) file 36 data elements. Demographic information about students for whom Student Load data are reported. Liability Status (LS) file 16 data elements. Records which represent student load and HECS liability for a particular stu- dent/course/semester/liability status. Student Load (LD) file 12 data elements. Information on all units of study under- taken by a student. Past Course Completions (PS) 16 data elements. Information on students who success- file fully completed the requirements of their course. HECS DUE (DU) file 23 data elements. The file is provided to the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) and contains information on a stu- dent’s debt (HECS, OLDPS, PELS, BOTPLS) and personal details required by the ATO for identification. Payment Option Declaration 20 data elements. An electronic record of the Payment (PO) file Option Declaration Form indicating a student has chosen to defer their HECS, OLDPS, PELS or BOTPLS debt.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 177

REPORTING APPLICABLE TO ELEMENT DESCRIPTION COMMENT REQUIREMENT WHICH PROVIDERS Staff Collection Table A and B institu- Full Time/Fractional Full 18 elements. Information on all staff employed on a full- tions under the Higher Time (FT) File time or part time basis at the institution during the reference Education Funding Act year. 1988 Casual (CA) file 7 elements. Information on all staff employed on a casual basis at the institution during the year prior to the reference year Finance Collection Table A institutions Financial Statement Guide- Approved form for institutions to use in preparing annual under the Higher Edu- lines for higher education financial statement. cation Funding Act institutions 1988 Research Data Collec- Table A and B institu- Research Income Return Research income received by an institution and its subsidi- tion tions under the Higher aries for a reference year, including research income from Education Funding Act Australian Competitive Grants; other public sector research 1988 income; industry and other research income; and Coopera- tive Research Centre (CRC) research income. Research Publications Return Number of books, book chapters, articles in scholarly refe- reed journals and full written conference papers produced by each institution. Vice-Chancellor’s certifica- Certifies that returns are correct and have been compiled in tion statement accordance with specifications. Vice-Chancellor’s CRC Cer- Certifies research income received by their respective insti- tification Statement tutions from CRCs. Audit certificate Certifies as correct the research income for Australian Competitive Grants; other public sector research income; and industry and other research income.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 178 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

REPORTING APPLICABLE TO ELEMENT DESCRIPTION COMMENT REQUIREMENT WHICH PROVIDERS Research and Research Table A and B institu- Part A Qualitative description of institution’s performance in re- Training Management tions under the Higher search and research training, plans for building on perform- Reports (included in Education Funding Act ance to date and future objectives. Educational Profiles 1988 Collection – see below)

Part B Quantitative data on research and research training per- formance in a standardised format. Four data tables: Total and commencing higher degree research (HDR) stu- dents Research income Research active staff Qualifications and activity of staff who supervised HDR students. Educational Profiles Table A institutions Strategic plans Qualitative description of main features of strategic plans Educational Profiles Collection under the Higher Edu- and commentary on substantial changes in strategies or core Process was the main cation Funding Act activities. mechanism for ensuring 1988 accountability, quality and fairness in higher education funding. Reporting required detailed descriptions of Research and Research Train- See section above plans and processes. ing Management Reports Capital asset management Tables and detailed commentary plans Student load data Four tables

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 179

REPORTING APPLICABLE TO ELEMENT DESCRIPTION COMMENT REQUIREMENT WHICH PROVIDERS Quality assurance and im- Detailed plans/report. provement plans Equity plans Detailed plans/report.

Indigenous education strate- Detailed strategies/report. gies 2005 REPORTING REQUIREMENTS (POST BACKING AUSTRALIA’S FUTURE) REPORTING APPLICABLE TO ELEMENT DESCRIPTION COMMENT REQUIREMENT WHICH PROVIDERS Student Collection Table A and B pro- Course of Study (CO) File 11 elements. Information in respect of a Renamed from Course File viders under the particular reference year for all courses Higher Education being offered by the provider. Support Act 2003. Reduced requirements apply to other Higher Education Providers. Student Enrolment (EN) 26 elements. Demographic information Reduction in data elements from 2003. File about students for whom Student Load data are reported. Student Load/Liability (LL) 23 elements. Records which represent stu- This file is an amalgamation of the Stu- file dent load and HELP debt liability for all dent Load File and Liability Status Files. units of study. It also includes the HELP debt at the unit level. This was formerly collected at the course level on the HECS DUE File.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 180 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

REPORTING APPLICABLE TO ELEMENT DESCRIPTION COMMENT REQUIREMENT WHICH PROVIDERS HELP DUE File 22 elements. Personal details required by Renamed from HECS DUE File the ATO for identification for students who have a HELP loan. Electronic Commonwealth 22 elements. An electronic record of the Renamed from Payment Option Declara- Assistance Form (ECAF) Electronic Commonwealth Assistance Form tion Form File File indicating a student has chosen to defer their HELP debt. Past Course Completions 18 elements. Information on students who Minor increase in data elements from (PS) File successfully completed the requirements of 2003. their course. Student Unit of Study Com- 7 elements. Information on a student’s pro- New File pletions (CU) File gress at the unit of study level. Student OS HELP (OS) File 9 elements. Information on students who New File. This is used for administering have an OS HELP loan. the OS-HELP Loan scheme. Commonwealth Learning 6 elements. Information on students who New File. This is used for administering Scholarships (SS) File have a CLS scholarship. the CLS scholarship scheme Campus (CM) file 16 elements. Detailed information on re- New File quirements for students to enter selected courses. Revisions (RF) File 17 elements. Used by providers to notify New File. DEST of changes to data due to remissions or revisions. Academic Organisational Unit (AOU) File no longer required.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 181

REPORTING APPLICABLE TO ELEMENT DESCRIPTION COMMENT REQUIREMENT WHICH PROVIDERS Staff Collection Table A and B pro- Full Time/Fractional Full 18 elements. Information on all staff em- No significant change from 2003. viders under the Time (FT) File ployed on a full-time or part time basis by Higher Education the provider during the reference year. Support Act 2003 Casual (CA) File 7 elements. Information on all staff em- No significant change from 2003. Requirement does not ployed on a casual basis by the provider apply to other Higher during the year prior to the reference year Education Providers. Finance Collection Table A providers Financial Statement Guide- Approved form for providers to use in pre- Form revised in 2004 to significantly under the Higher lines for higher education paring annual financial statement. streamline reporting and acquittal of Education Support institutions Commonwealth financial assistance. Act 2003 Revised form modelled on Pricewater- houseCoopers best practice guide (‘Value Accounts’) published annually in conjunction with Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia and CPA Aus- tralia. Requirement to report on expense by function and segment information re- moved.

Research Data Collec- Table A and Table B Research Income Return Research income received by a provider and No significant changes from 2003. tion providers under the its subsidiaries for a reference year, includ- Higher Education ing research income from Australian Com- Support Act 2003 petitive Grants; other public sector research income; industry and other research income; and Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) research income.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 182 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

REPORTING APPLICABLE TO ELEMENT DESCRIPTION COMMENT REQUIREMENT WHICH PROVIDERS Research Publications Re- Number of books, book chapters, articles in No significant changes from 2003. turn scholarly refereed journals and full written conference papers produced by each pro- vider. Vice-Chancellors certifica- Certifies that returns are correct and have No significant changes from 2003. tion statement been compiled in accordance with specifica- tions. Vice-Chancellor’s CRC Certifies research income received by their No significant changes from 2003. Certification Statement respective providers from CRCs. Audit certificate Certifies as correct the research income for No significant changes from 2003. Australian Competitive Grants; other public sector research income; and industry and other research income. Research and Research Table A and Table B Part A Qualitative description of provider’s per- No significant changes from 2003. The Training Management providers under the formance in research and research training, frequency of RRTMRs has been reduced. Reports (RRTMRs) Higher Education plans for building on performance to date From 2005, providers are required to (instructions released in Support Act 2003 and future objectives. explain the allocation method used for conjunction with Insti- Part B Quantitative data on research and research internal distribution of research block tutional Assessment training performance in a standardised for- funds and to provide existing data by Framework Information mat. Four data tables to be completed: areas of research strength. Collection 2005 instruc- Total and commencing higher degree re- tions) search (HDR) students Research income Research active staff Qualifications and activity of staff who supervised HDR students.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 183

REPORTING APPLICABLE TO ELEMENT DESCRIPTION COMMENT REQUIREMENT WHICH PROVIDERS Institution Assessment Table A and B pro- Strategic plans No commentary now required - only a web In order to keep providers’ reporting Framework (IAF) In- viders under the link or an electronic version of publicly requirements to a minimum, the IAF formation Collection Higher Education available document. analysis is primarily based on existing [Replaces the Educa- Support Act 2003 Research and research See section above and publicly available data sources such tional Profiles Collec- training management re- as the student, staff and research data tion] ports collections; strategic, business and risk Capital asset management Significantly reduced commentary required. management plans; and audited financial plans statement. Student load data Three tables with reduced data elements. Quality assurance and improvement Table A providers Equity plans Significantly reduced in scope. Requires plans not required. only updates of changes from previous years. Indigenous education state- Significantly reduced in scope. Requires ments only updates of changes from previous years required.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 184 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Aircraft Weapons (Question No. 479) Senator Mark Bishop asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 24 March 2005: With reference to the weapons carried by the F/A-18 aircraft: (1) What weapons (missiles or bombs) are deployable on the F/A-18 but not on the F35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF). (2) For each of these weapons, can a description be provided of its capability, purpose and cost. (3) Is the AGM-142 a weapon that can be deployed on the F/A-18 but not on the JSF. (4) What is the total stock of weapons (not individually) that can be deployed on the F/A-18 but not on the JSF. Senator Hill—The answer to the honorable senator’s question is as follows: (1) The RAAF F/A-18 can carry the AGM84 Harpoon air-to-surface missile, but there are no plans for the JSF to carry the weapon. While the RAAF F/A-18 can carry the Advanced Short Range Air-to- Air Missile, a decision is yet to be made on whether the Australian JSF will also carry this weapon. (2) The unit cost of weapons is classified. However, the capability and purpose of these weapons are as follows: (a) The AGM84 Harpoon is a subsonic, all-weather, over-the-horizon anti-ship missile that uses radar terminal guidance. The Harpoon is carried by a number of Australian Defence Force aircraft, ships and submarines and provides them with a potent capability to attack ships from beyond 60 nautical miles. (b) The Advanced Short Range Air-to-Air Missile is a short-range, infra-red guided air-to-air mis- sile. The weapon provides the F/A-18 with a leading edge, within visual range counter-air ca- pability. (3) Neither the F/A-18 nor JSF can carry the AGM-142. (4) Australian weapon stock numbers are classified. Aircraft Weapons (Question No. 480) Senator Mark Bishop asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 24 March 2005: With reference to the weapons carried by F-111 aircraft: (1) What weapons (missiles or bombs) are deployable on the F-111 but not on the F35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF). (2) For each of these weapons, can a description be provided of its capability, purpose and cost. (3) Is the AGM-142 a weapon that can be deployed on the F-111 but not on the JSF. (4) What is the total stock of weapons (not individually) that can be deployed on the F-111 but not on the JSF. Senator Hill—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) The AGM84 Harpoon air-to-surface missile, the AIM-9M air-to-air missile and the AGM-142 air- to-surface missile. (2) The unit cost of weapons is classified. However, the capability and purpose of these weapons are as follows:

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 185

(a) The AGM84 Harpoon is a subsonic, all-weather, over-the-horizon anti-ship missile that uses radar terminal guidance. The Harpoon is carried by a number of ADF aircraft, ships and sub- marines, and provides a potent capability to attack ships from beyond 60 nautical miles. (b) The AIM-9M is a short-range, infra-red guided air-to-air missile. The weapon provides the F-111 with a self-defence capability against hostile aircraft within visual range. (c) The AGM-142 is an air-to-surface missile that uses electro-optical terminal guidance and is intended primarily for use against fixed targets. (3) Yes. (4) Australian weapon stock numbers are classified. Mr David Hicks (Question No. 486) Senator Ludwig asked the Minister representing the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 30 March 2005: With reference to the Attorney-General’s statement of 5 September 2004 regarding concerns about the procedural fairness of Mr David Hicks’ military commission trial: (1) Has the Government expressed concerns to the Government of the United States of America (US) about the fairness of the trial process and if so, on how many occasions and on what dates were the concerns expressed. (2) What specific concerns about the trial process were raised with the US Government. (3) What response was received from the US Government in regard to these concerns. (4) What is the Government’s latest understanding about timing of Mr Hicks’ trial. (5) Is the Government aware of any changes which are being made to the arrangements for Mr Hicks’ trial in regard to: (a) the rules of evidence; (b) the appeals process; (c) the appointment and qualifi- cations of the presiding officer or judge; and (d) any other substantive or procedural changes. (6) What, if any, are the changes and when did the Government become aware of these changes. Senator Ellison—The Attorney-General has provided the following answer to the honour- able senator’s question: (1) The Government has consistently expressed to the United States its view that Mr Hicks’ trial should be fair and expeditious. Following the August 2005 preliminary hearing in Mr Hicks’ case, the Government discussed with United States authorities concerns about procedural aspects of the military commission process. The concerns were conveyed to the United States via a third person note on 7 October 2004. The Government maintains an open dialogue with the United States on matters relating to Mr Hicks’ case and discussions between officials occur at various times as needed. (2) The concerns relate to an ongoing dialogue between Governments and it would not be appropriate to discuss them. (3) See (2). (4) On the order of the Appointing Authority, Mr Hicks’ trial is held in abeyance pending the outcome of a decision in the case of Hamdan v Rumsfeld. Oral argument in that case was heard in mid- March and a decision has yet to be handed down by the court. (5) The Government is aware of media reports that the United States is considering changes to the military commission system. To date no changes have been made and the Government is not aware precisely what changes, if any, will be made. (6) See (5).

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 186 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Caesium 137 (Question No. 489) Senator Allison asked the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, upon notice, on 6 April 2005: (1) Is the Minister aware of measurements taken by the then-named Australian Radiation Laboratory in the 1990s for the Interdepartmental Committee on Joint Military Operations on levels of Caesium 137 in sediments in Port Phillip Bay. (2) In considering whether the proposed channel deepening exercise in Port Phillip Bay should be treated as a ‘controlled action’ under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999: (a) did the Minister take into account any measurements relating to the presence of Cae- sium 137; and (b) were any of those measurements taken in the past 3 years; if not, why not. (3) Can evidence be provided as to whether or not the proposed channel-deepening exercise will liber- ate Caesium 137 from the sediments of Port Phillip Bay, and on what might be the potential effect on the Bay’s plant and animal life, and the food chain; if not, why not. (4) Was consideration given, through the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act referral or any other process, to the potential for nuclear-powered warships such as the USS Enter- prise docking in Melbourne as a result of the channel-deepening exercise. (5) (a) What does the Minister consider might be the possible environmental implications of such vis- its; and (b) will measurements of Caesium 137 be taken before and after docking, as previously conducted; if not, why not. Senator Ian Campbell—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) No. However I understand that Senator Patterson is providing details on those measurements in response to a similar question on notice from you. (2) (a) No. (b) See answer to (1). (3) To the extent that the presence of Caesium 137 may be relevant to the Port Phillip Bay Channel Deepening Project, it will be addressed in the assessment and approval process under the Environ- ment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. (4) This issue was not raised in the referral under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Con- servation Act 1999. (5) (a) The environmental implications of such visits would be considered at the time a proposal was made. (b) Under the arrangement for visits of nuclear powered warships to Australian ports, sedi- ment and, where available, shell fish samples are collected before and after each visit and are ana- lysed by the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency. Port Phillip Bay (Question No. 490) Senator Allison asked the Minister representing the Minister for Health and Ageing, upon notice, on 6 April 2005: (1) Can data be provided on the measurements taken of Caesium 137 in the sediment at the head of Port Phillip Bay by the then-named Australian Radiation Laboratory in the 1990s for the Interde- partmental Committee on Joint Military Operations. (2) Has the Minister advised the Minister for Environment and Heritage that Caesium 137 was found in Port Phillip Bay sediment by the Australian Radiation Laboratory at the time.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 187

(3) Does the Government consider that the proposed channel-deepening is likely to liberate Caesium 137; if not, why not; if so, has the Minister advised the Minister for the Environment and Heritage and the Victorian State Minister for the Environment. (4) Can the Minister confirm that the presence of Caesium 137 was due to fallout from the above- ground testing of nuclear weapons in the Pacific Ocean by the French, the United States of America and United Kingdom Governments in the 1980s and 1990s which, unlike in other Australian ports, has been concentrated in Port Phillip Bay. (5) Has the Government considered the likelihood of Caesium 137 entering the food chain as a result of the disturbance of sediment for the proposed channel-deepening; if not, why not. (6) What, if any, are the restrictions on nuclear-powered warships such as the USS Enterprise docking in Melbourne. (7) Is it the case that proposed channel-deepening in Port Phillip Bay will allow the USS Enterprise to dock in Melbourne where currently it cannot because of size; if so, will measurements of Caesium 137 be taken before and after docking, as previously conducted; if not, why not. Senator Patterson—The Minister for Health and Ageing has provided the following an- swer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) Measurements by the Australian Radiation Laboratory of 137Cs in the 1990s of sediments from Port Phillip Bay show activity concentrations in the range 2 to 5 Becquerel per kilogram. The con- tamination levels in Port Phillip Bay are similar to those found generally in soils and sediments throughout Australia. In comparison the level of naturally occurring radionuclides in soils is ap- proximately 1000 Becquerel per kilogram. (2) As noted in (1) above, the contamination levels in Port Phillip Bay are similar to those found gen- erally in soils and sediments throughout Australia and as such there was no need to advise the Min- ister for Environment and Heritage of these particular measurements. (3) There is no evidence of high concentrations of 137Cs in Port Phillip Bay. Any mixing of sediments as a result of channel deepening should not change the concentration. (4) The 137Cs in Port Phillip Bay is due to global fallout from atmospheric nuclear weapons testing during the 1960s and 1970s. In view of the relative numbers of atmospheric tests, most of the ac- tivity is from testing that occurred in the northern hemisphere. As noted in (2) and (3) above, the contamination levels in Port Phillip Bay are similar to those found generally in soils and sediments throughout Australia.. (5) There have been extensive studies of global fallout and the resulting doses to humans from con- taminated foods. These studies have recently been summarised by the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation in UNSCEAR 2000, Report to the General Assem- bly. The continued impact of ingestion of 137Cs from global fallout in the year 2000 was esti- mated to be less than one thousandth of the level of natural background radiation and thus not of concern. (6) The arrangements for nuclear powered warship visits to Australia are overseen by the Visiting Ships Panel (Nuclear) chaired by the Department of Defence. This question should be referred to the Minister for Defence. (7) This question should be referred to the Minister for Defence. Spanish Latin American Welfare Centre (Question No. 491) Senator Allison asked the Minister representing the Minister for Citizenship and Multicul- tural Affairs, upon notice, on 6 April 2005:

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 188 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

With reference to the funding cuts to the Spanish Latin American Welfare Centre (CELAS): (1) Can Information be provided on the Government’s funding of ethnic community groups. (2) (a) What was CELAS’ original budget through the Community Settlement Services Scheme (CSSS); and (b) how much has the budget been reduced by in the financial year 2004-05. (3) What were the reasons for this cut back in funding. (4) In view of the funding cut back, to what extent will CELAS be able to fulfil its excellent commu- nity services to the Spanish community in the future. Senator Vanstone—The Minister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) The Government provides funding under the Community Settlement Services Scheme (CSSS) to local government bodies and not-for-profit organisations, including eligible ethnic community groups to provide settlement services to: - individual migrants in the Settlement Services Target Group, i.e. permanent residents, who have arrived in the last five years, as humanitarian program entrants or family stream migrants with low English proficiency, who require assistance to access mainstream services and participate in the community; and - communities with significant numbers from the Settlement Services Target Group, who need as- sistance to develop their capacity to organise, plan and advocate for services to meet their own needs. Funding is directed towards those most in need, particularly humanitarian entrants of small and emerging communities, i.e. communities with an Australia-wide population of less than 15,000, at least 30 per cent of whom arrived in the last five years. (2) (a) In 2003-04, CELAS received CSSS funding totalling $112,020. In 2004-05, CELAS has re- ceived a CSSS grant of $65,280. (b) This is a reduction of $46,740. (3) CELAS provides settlement services to a community which is relatively established with a small number of new arrivals. CSSS funding is limited and focused on the urgent needs of the Settle- ment Services Target Group. (4) CELAS receives funding from a number of other sources to provide services to the Spanish com- munity in Melbourne. There are also a number of other organisations in the area funded to provide settlement services, to which CELAS could refer clients. Recherche Bay (Question No. 492) Senator Brown asked the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, upon notice, on 7 April 2005: (1) Is the Minister aware that the Forest Practices Plan (FPP) for Recherche Bay, certified on 31 March 2005, includes a road through the Southport Lagoon Wildlife Sanctuary which threatens the criti- cally-endangered swamp eyebright by providing access to 4WDs. (2) Does the Minister agree that the ditch and topsoil stockpile arrangement specified in the FPP to ‘minimise the chance of 4WD vehicles gaining access’ is a proven failure, with the existing track having been breached already in a number of places. (3) Is the Minister aware that landowners can approve unrestricted access to persons other than logging operators to the proposed road into and through the Southport Lagoon Wildlife Sanctuary, and does the Minister agree that this effectively opens the potential for wide public access and further en- dangers the swamp eyebright.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 189

(4) (a) Does the Minister agree that the measures in the FPP to minimise 4WD access to the Wildlife Sanctuary are totally inadequate and that the road is likely to have a significant impact on the swamp eyebright which is a listed threatened species; and (b) what can be done to protect the swamp eyebright. Senator Ian Campbell—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) I am aware that the Forest Practices Plan for Recherche Bay includes a road through the Southport Lagoon Wildlife Sanctuary. This road is approximately 1km from the swamp eyebright. (2) I am advised that the road has been constructed in accordance with the Forest Practices Plan and that repair work is being carried out where breaches have occurred. (3) Access to the road is a matter for the Tasmanian Government and the landowners. (4) (a) No. (b) Management of the Southport Lagoon Wildlife Sanctuary is the responsibility of the Tasma- nian Government. Blood Banks (Question No. 493) Senator O’Brien asked the Minister representing the Minister for Health and Ageing, upon notice, on 8 April 2005: (1) By state and territory, what are the locations of permanent blood banks in regional and rural Aus- tralia. (2) In each of the financial years 2003-04 and 2004-05 to date, which locations in regional and rural Australia have had permanent blood bank services withdrawn, and in each case: (a) what was the responsible decision-making body; (b) when was the service withdrawn; and (c) did community consultation precede the decision to withdraw the service. (3) In each of the financial years 2003-04 and 2004-05 to date, which locations in regional and rural Australia have had permanent blood bank services reduced, and in each case: (a) what was the re- sponsible decision-making body; (b) when was the service reduced; (c) what was the nature of the reduction; and (d) did community consultation precede the decision to reduce the service. (4) In each case where a permanent blood bank service has been withdrawn, has a mobile blood donor service been instituted; if so, does this mobile blood donor service provide an equivalent donor fa- cility. (5) Has the withdrawal or reduction of blood donor services in regional and rural Australia had any impact on blood donations; if so, can that impact be quantified. (6) Has the Government taken any action to maintain permanent blood bank services in regional and rural Australia; if so, what action and what result can be attributed to that action; if not, why not. Senator Patterson—The Minister for Health and Ageing has provided the following an- swer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) The location of permanent blood banks in regional and rural Australia at 26 April 2005 is listed by State at Table 1. These locations are determined by the Australian Red Cross Blood Service which is jointly funded by the Commonwealth and the states.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 190 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Table 1: Permanent blood banks – regional and rural areas. New South Wales Northern Queensland Tasmania Victoria Western Territory Australia Albury Alice Springs Nambour Launceston Ballarat Rockingham Armidale Southport Burnie Bendigo Albany Coffs Harbour Townsville Devonport Geelong Broome Dubbo Cairns Sale Bunbury Gosford Mackay Hamilton Geraldton Wyong Maryborough Horsham Kalgoorlie Woy Woy Rockhampton Latrobe Port Hedland Goulburn Toowoomba Warragul Griffith Bundaberg Mildura Kempsey Gladstone Shepparton Lismore Gympie Swan Hill Newcastle Wangaratta Maitland Warrnambool Cessnock Orange Tamworth Taree Wagga Wagga Wollongong (2) No blood bank services were withdrawn in regional and rural Australia in 2003-04. Table 2 identifies rural and regional areas by state that have had permanent blood bank services withdrawn in the course of 2004-05 financial year. Queensland and Victoria were the only states affected. Table 2: Permanent blood banks withdrawn– regional and rural areas, including the date of with- drawal. Queensland Victoria Ipswich (02/02/2005) Ararat (17/01/2005) Bairnesdale (17/01/2005) Beechworth (17/01/2005) Benalla (17/01/2005) Camperdown (17/01/2005) Castlemaine (17/01/2005) Cobram (17/01/2005) Colac (17/01/2005) Donald (17/01/2005) Euchuca (17/01/2005) Euroa (17/01/2005) Kerang (18/08/2004) Maryborough (17/01/2005) Myrtleford (17/01/2005) Nhill (17/01/2005) Nyah West (19/08/2004) Portland (17/01/2005)

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 191

Queensland Victoria Rutherglen (17/01/2005) Sea Lake (20/08/2004) Stawell 17/01/2005) Terang (17/01/2005) Warragul (17/01/2005) Wonthaggi (17/01/2005) Yarrawonga (17/01/2005) (a) The Australian Red Cross Blood Service in consultation with the Australian Red Cross Society was the decision-making body in regard to the withdrawal of these services. (b) The date of withdrawal of the service is shown at Table 2. (c) The Australian Red Cross Blood Service (ARCBS) advises that specific community consulta- tion was not undertaken in every case prior to the withdrawal of these services. All donors were advised of the reasons for the changes and of their alternative donation venues. (3) No blood bank services were reduced in regional and rural Australia in 2003-04. In 2004-05, the following locations in regional and rural Australia have had permanent blood bank services reduced: Barham and Cohuna. (a) The ARCBS in consultation with the Australian Red Cross Society was the decision-making body in regard to the reduction of these services. (b) The services were reduced on 16/08/2004 (Barham) and 17/08/2004 (Cohuna). (c) The frequency of return visits to these locations were reduced. (d) The ARCBS advises that specific community consultation was not undertaken in every case prior to the reduction of these services. All donors were advised of the reasons for the changes and of their alternative donation venues. (4) No. The ARCBS is piloting a specially equipped blood collection vehicle – a donormobile. The sites where the criteria for participation in the donormobile pilot are met are: Bairnesdale, Benalla, Castlemaine, Colac, Echuca and Warragul. (5) The ARCBS has advised that the withdrawal or reduction of blood donor services in regional and rural Australia has not had any impact on overall donations or the capacity to meet the blood and blood product needs of the Australian community. (6) No. The ARCBS is responsible for making decisions about blood bank services in regional and rural Australia within the total funding made available to it by all governments and takes into ac- count a variety of factors including costs and availability of donors and staff. The closures and re- ductions are part of a wider strategy to ensure the ARCBS is an effective and sustainable national organisation in the immediate and longer term. The ARCBS is a humanitarian non-profit organisation, funded by Commonwealth and state and territory governments to engage in the collection of blood and blood related products and services from volunteer donors and the supply of these products and services to the Australian community. Forensic Computing and Computer Investigations Workshop (Question No. 505) Senator Ludwig asked the Minister for Justice and Customs, upon notice, on 11 April 2005:

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 192 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

(1) (a) What is the total cost of the Forensic Computing and Computer Investigations Workshop held at the Australian Federal Police College in Canberra; (b) how often is the course run; and (c) who benefits from the course. (2) Does the Government cover the costs of visiting experts including members of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Microsoft experts; if so, what is the cost. (3) Does the Government receive payment for the training of international law enforcement officers; if so, what is the total remuneration received for each course. (4) What is the total remuneration paid to Microsoft for the training of Australian law enforcement officers. (5) Does Australia assist or subsidise any smaller Asia-Pacific countries with the costs of training in this area; if so, what is the total subsidised cost. Senator Ellison—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) (a) Approximately $100,000. (b) Since 2003, the course has been conducted twice. (c) Investigators and computer forensic experts from State and Territory police services, Commonwealth law en- forcement, revenue, and regulatory agencies, international law enforcement agencies, and selected private sector organisations. (2) Approximately $20,000 was paid to cover the costs for two Microsoft experts. (3) The AFP has not received payment for training international law enforcement officers in high-tech crime. (4) Microsoft has only been reimbursed for costs; refer to the answer to question (2). (5) The Australian Federal Police (AFP) provided training assistance to the Vietnamese Police to in- vestigate instances of high tech crime. Such assistance is funded through the AFP’s Law Enforce- ment Cooperation Program (LECP) and the cost of the program is approximately $75,020. The AFP LECP paid approximately $10,200 for six participants from Asia-Pacific countries to at- tend the Computer Forensics and Computer Investigations Workshop. Child Sex Tourism Laws (Question No. 507) Senator Ludwig asked the Minister for Justice and Customs, upon notice, on 11 April 2005: (1) (a) How many people have been charged under the extraterritorial child sex tourism law since it was proclaimed; and (b) how many people have been convicted under this law. (2) How was the Australian Federal Police’s Transnational Sexual Exploitation Team (TSSET) advised of the allegations raised against Mr Gregory Roy Cook. (3) Does sentencing for extraterritorial child sex tourism offences involve the same penalties as similar domestic offences. (4) With reference to Australians who have been charged in relation to paedophilia activities overseas: (a) of these, how many: (i) were successfully prosecuted, and (ii) are any currently under appeal; (b) does the Government fly the victim to Australia to give evidence; if so, what has been the cost for the past 2 financial years; and (c) of the prosecutions secured overseas, with how many cases were TSETT or Australian Customs Service officers asked to assist. Senator Ellison—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) (a) 19. (b) 13. (2) A complaint was made to the AFP Senior Liaison Officer, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 193

(3) The Commonwealth Crimes (Child Sex Tourism) Amendment Act 1994, created extraterritorial child sex tourism offences. The legislation specifically refers to travel and exploitation, and con- tains penalties of up to 17 years imprisonment. The legislation is designed to prosecute Australian citizens when prosecution does not proceed in the country where the offence was committed. There are no similar domestic offences. Penalties for domestic offences relating to sexual intercourse with young persons differ between States and Territories. In the Australian Capital Territory, section 55(1) of the Crimes Act 1900 re- fers to the offence of sexual intercourse with a person under 16 years of age. The offence is pun- ishable on conviction by 17 years imprisonment. (4) (a) 34 Australian nationals have been charged overseas by foreign law enforcement agencies for offences regarding the sexual exploitation of children. (i) Ten people were convicted. (ii) Nil. (b) One victim was flown to Australia to give evidence. The cost was borne by the Common- wealth Director of Public Prosecutions (CDPP). This is a question more appropriately an- swered by the CDPP. (c) Foreign law enforcement agencies have not requested the assistance of the AFP Transnational Sexual Exploitation and Trafficking Team (TSETT). The AFP cannot answer on behalf of the Australian Customs Services. Courts (Question No. 508 amended) Senator Ludwig asked the Minister for Justice and Customs, upon notice, on 11 March 2005: With reference to the recommendations of the report on the ‘Review of the Federal Magistrates Court’: (1) Has any progress been made on the consideration of Recommendation 2 of the report; if so, what progress has been made. (2) What were the reasons for the low client satisfaction rates of the Family Court of 54 per cent, com- pared with its target of 75 per cent. (3) What steps have been taken to increase the client satisfaction rate; if no steps have been taken, why not. (4) If steps have been taken to increase the client satisfaction rate, how effective have they been. (5) With reference to the discussion paper, ‘A New Approach to the Family Law System’, when is the Government expected to release its position following consideration of the submissions. (6) With reference to Recommendation 7 of the report, have the Family Court, Federal Court and Fed- eral Magistrates Court established the recommended costing methodology; if not, at what stage are they. Senator Ellison—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) Recommendation 2 of the report on the Review of the Federal Magistrates Court is under consid- eration by the Government. (2) The Family Court has provided the following information in relation to questions (2), (3) and (4). The Portfolio Budget Statement (PBS) for the Family Court stipulates a client satisfaction target that ‘75% of clients are satisfied with Court resolution (i.e. mediation) processes’. According to the 2003-04 Annual Report of the Family Court, in the 2004 Client Satisfaction Survey the Court achieved a client satisfaction level of 54% for Court resolution processes.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 194 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

The Court is concerned about the level of client satisfaction. It notes that, having regard to the increasing availability of mediation services in the community and the role of the Federal Magis- trates Court, less complex family disputes are increasingly likely to be resolved or determined without approaching the Family Court. Consequently, the matters that do come to the Court are in- creasingly the more complex and difficult, involving more entrenched issues and disputes. The Court considers that client satisfaction with the Court’s resolution services is impacted by the fact that court mediation occurs after clients’ personal positions have become entrenched and that, in such circumstances, it is likely that many clients’ assessment of the system is affected by the emo- tional turmoil associated with the relationship breakdown that they have experienced. Accordingly, the Court considers that the client survey response is affected (at least in part) by clients’ experi- ences during relationship breakdowns (especially those involving children) as much as by the length of time to reach finalisation, the complexity of these cases, and the tangible costs involved for cases requiring judicial determination. The Court advises that the highest rated area of client satisfaction was with ‘Staff Professionalism’, at a national average of 87% client satisfaction. Clients were highly satisfied with staff behaviours and professionalism, reporting that staff were polite and approachable, sensitive to needs, and maintained privacy and confidentiality. Further, a significant number of clients rated themselves as being ‘neither satisfied nor dissatisfied’ with the relevant services provided by the Court. Under the survey methodology, these clients were effectively counted with those who gave an unsatisfactory rating. The Court notes that, from the survey, there is a direct correlation between increased client dissatis- faction and the duration of proceedings in the Court – that is, the longer their matter took to final- ise, the more dissatisfied the client. This is a significant issue, which the Court is presently address- ing through several major initiatives (reported below in response to Question (3)). (3) The Court advises that it has responded promptly to the client needs identified in the client satisfac- tion survey. The Court analysed those characteristics that most influenced the level of client satis- faction with the Court’s performance. These were timeliness, informed and objective staff, and the conduct of events (i.e. clear explanation of event process, understanding expectations of behaviour, treatment with respect during event). The Court advises it has already taken the following steps, based on the evidence from the survey, to improve the experiences of clients: • During a series of eight workshops between December 2004 and April 2005, the Court en- gaged in extensive consultation and discussion with a variety of stakeholders including all staff and the judiciary, clients, community based client groups and practitioners. The focus groups of external stakeholders were facilitated by an independent facilitator, without direct Court involvement in order to ensure robust and unfettered stakeholder opinion and input. • Registry Business Planning has adopted, as the key criteria to be addressed in action planning for 2005/06, timeliness, informed and objective staff, and improving how events are con- ducted. • Additional training is regularly being provided to staff on providing clear and accurate infor- mation and being balanced and impartial in their dealings. • A variety of continuous client feedback mechanisms, including point of service surveying, are being employed to ensure the Court has a clear and accurate understanding of client issues on a real time basis. The results of this feedback will inform decision making processes across other strategic projects of the Court. • Registrars and Mediators have reviewed their conference processes including timing, opening statements and the desired outcomes of each event, to ensure that clients have a clear under- standing of the purpose of each event.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 195

The Court also advises that the steps it is taking to increase client satisfaction include two major innovations, which fundamentally alter the Court’s processes and structure, and other initiatives to target specific areas of client needs. The major innovations are the Combined Registry Initiative and the Children’s Cases Program. The Combined Registry Initiative The ‘Combined Registry’ initiative is part of the Government’s response to the report of the par- liamentary inquiry into child custody arrangements in the event of family separation, ‘Every Pic- ture Tells a Story’. This initiative will fundamentally change the way the Family Court of Australia works with the Federal Magistrates Court. Implementation of a combined registry will simplify the process for clients entering the Courts, and will streamline the progression of matters to the point of determination, where that is required, resulting in a more efficient progression through the courts to conclusion. The Court has worked closely with the Federal Magistrates Court and the Attorney- General’s Department on this initiative, and has invested significantly in obtaining the input and feedback of other stakeholders by way of stakeholder workshops, which involved the Federal Mag- istrates Court and the legal profession. The Children’s Cases Program The Children’s Cases Program is intended to enable a less adversarial process for clients of the Court, to reduce the number of necessary courtroom events (thus reducing costs), and to achieve more satisfactory and durable outcomes. The pilot in Parramatta and Sydney has accepted over 200 matters. External, independent evaluators are monitoring pilot progress, and interim evaluation re- ports are expected in September 2005. Other initiatives include the following. Development of Client Perspective Model The Development of the Client Perspective Model has involved the creation of ‘case coordinator’ positions – client service officers are assigned cases as soon as the application is lodged. If the case becomes complex, the client receives additional support (i.e. with information about compli- ance, documents required, interpreters etc). Structures and positions have been reviewed in client service sections to ensure consistency across the Court. Service is more personalised and tailored to suit client needs. A comprehensive case management manual has been developed, and on-line training for staff is now available. Staff members are being multi-skilled across all registry activi- ties, and two surveys to all staff regarding improvements to the model have been undertaken in the last 12 months, as a result of which the model has been further refined. Communication with Clients / Provision of Information A project has been established to audit and review all letters produced in registries for the Family Court and the Federal Magistrates Court. A standard set of letters produced by the electronic case management system is being produced to coincide with the implementation of the combined regis- try. Initial scoping and identification of required improvements to the national phone system was produced in November 2004. Identification of options and planning is being undertaken currently with a finish date of mid- 2005. The Family Court advises that it continues to work with other federal courts and tribunals to de- velop a Commonwealth portal for the delivery of web-based services (such as e-lodgement and e- filing). In recent times, the Family Court has played a leading role in the continued development of courts technologies, such as ‘Casetrack’, intended specifically to improve provision of information and communication with clients. The Court’s commitment to continued technological advance- ments, in order to improve provision of information and communication with clients, will be piv- otal to improved client satisfaction over time.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 196 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Self-Represented Litigants The Court is undertaking the following programs to support self-represented litigants: • An information brochure promoting the ‘step by step guide’ for self-represented litigants is be- ing developed (to be available in community based organisations and court registries). • A self-represented litigants kit is being developed in collaboration with Federal Magistrates Court, Family Court and external agencies. • An e-learning package is being developed for Court staff, to help better understand what in- formation they can provide to self-represented litigants. • A joint management plan is being developed between the Federal Magistrates Court and Fam- ily Court. Men’s Issues The following steps are being taken to improve satisfaction levels among male clients: • greater engagement with recognised organisations such as Mensline, No to Violence, Dads in Distress, to commence relationship building and explore possible partnership approaches; • delivery of the first iteration of a training package (developed by Crisis Support Services and Mensline) for client services staff; and • targeting of new initiatives in a way that is designed to meet the needs and concerns of men as well as women (eg Mental Health Initiative, Family Violence Project). (4) The Court advises that it has invested significant effort and resources in addressing the issues pre- sented in the client satisfaction survey report. The major initiatives outlined above being developed and implemented to improve client satisfaction are significant undertakings that represent funda- mental changes to the Court’s business processes, structure and organisation. Additionally, these initiatives are closely interdependent and involve numerous other stakeholders. Appropriately, this detailed and comprehensive planning effort will incorporate monitoring and evaluation mecha- nisms that will enable the Court routinely monitor the effectiveness of these changes in terms of client satisfaction, and will enable identification of further opportunities for improvement. Following the recent client satisfaction survey, the Court is presently undertaking a comprehensive legal practitioner satisfaction survey, as part of an ongoing commitment to improve service deliv- ery to all Court users. It is not intended that a further comprehensive client satisfaction survey will be conducted during 2005-06. (5) Part of the Government’s response to the discussion paper, ‘A New Approach to the Family Law System’ was announced in the 2005-2006 Budget. (6) Recommendation 7 has not yet been fully implemented but significant work has been done by the three Courts to ensure a common understanding of each of the Court’s differing financial models and to align the current costing methodologies. Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands (Question No. 509) Senator Ludwig asked the Minister for Justice and Customs, upon notice, on 11 April 2005: (1) Is the Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands (RAMSI) providing anti-corruption training to Solomon Islands police; if so, is RAMSI also providing this training to other public servants. (2) Since March 2005, how many arrests have been made in relation to charges of corruption. (3) What logistical support is being given to the Solomon Islands judicial system to assist in the proc- essing of the recently-laid charges.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 197

(4) (a) When was the last review of troop numbers; and (b) what was the outcome of that review. Senator Ellison—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) Yes. The work of RAMSI in stabilising the work of law and order, and facilitating economic recov- ery has involved a strategic approach to the repair and restoration of government systems. RAMSI is working to strengthen the three accountability mechanisms – the Ombudsman Office, the Leadership Code Commission, and the Office of the Auditor-General. Under RAMSI, civilian advisers have been placed in all three institutions and a review of the existing accountability framework has commenced. RAMSI is also supporting improved infrastructure and information management systems across the three institutions. RAMSI is working to strengthen the capacity of the wider public service to fight corruption by helping government agencies to develop a framework of law, policies, procedures and manuals to ensure open and consistent decision making. Assistance to Solomon Islands Parliament is focussed on rebuilding Parliament’s review role and the accountability of Members of Parliament. An improved flow of performance information to Parliament and the public will help citizens to hold elected officials and public servants to account for their actions. (2) One. (3) Logistical support provided to the Solomon Islands judicial system includes two 12 week courses for Royal Solomon Islands Police prosecutors and the establishment of a Prosecution Support Unit in October 2004 to assist the Participating Police Forces (PPF) with the coordination of High Court Trials. (4) (a) The first review of PPF personnel in RAMSI is currently under way. Questions regarding mili- tary personnel numbers should be directed to the Minister for Defence. (b) See answer to (a) above. Passport Readers (Question No. 513) Senator Ludwig asked the Minister for Justice and Customs, upon notice, on 11 April 2005: With reference to the reports in the Australian Financial Review of 10 March 2005 that ‘three passport readers could only read the chips accurately 58%, 43% and 31% of the time, respectively’: (1) Are these reports accurate. (2) How many readers are available that read the chips accurately less than 90 per cent of the time. (3) Have the modifications to the chip readers resulted in any extra delays or expenditure; if so, can details be provided of the delays and expenditure. (4) Are there any mechanisms in place to accredit the manufacturers of passport readers to ensure that they are in line with international standards; if so, what are these mechanisms, and by whom are they developed and administered; if not, why not. (5) Has any work been done on the mass production of personal e-passports in line with the deadline set by the United States of America (US) of 26 October 2005; if so, how far has this progressed; if not, when is work due to begin. (6) Is there a schedule of dates to meet the US deadline; if so, can details be provided, including pro- gress against meeting the dates. (7) With reference to the proposal to add metal fibres to passport wallets to prevent skimming of data: (a) how does this work; (b) how effective is it in preventing data-skimming; (c) has the Australian

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 198 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Customs Service commissioned any studies into data-skimming, or is it aware of any studies; and (d) has any decision been made on whether to add the metal fibres. Senator Ellison—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade have provided the following answers. (1) No (2) At least 15 vendors manufacture readers that read chips accurately. We would not consider acquir- ing readers that read accurately less than 90 per cent of the time (3) No (4) International standards developed by the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) and ratified by the International Standards Organisation (ISO) represent compliance mechanisms. Standard acquisition processes would require compliance with standards. (5) Approximately 10,000 ePassports have already been mass-produced using equipment especially designed for this purpose. Approximately 2,500 of these documents have been issued to Qantas crew who are currently using them to travel to other countries and re-enter Australia. The ePass- ports project remains on track to meet a 26 October 2005 deadline. (6) An implementation plan will be finalised by the end of May 2005. The ordering of materials and supporting software and hardware is scheduled for June. Live trials will be conducted with the US between June and September. The booklet production facility will be established in July. The roll- out of chip reading and writing systems, the training of staff and the distribution of booklets is scheduled for August/September 2005 and Australian ePassports are scheduled to be issued from October. (7) Research has been undertaken in to the possible use of metal fibres in passports wallets. (a) metal fibres interfere with any possible transmissions from the chip. (b) our research indicates that it could be effective. (c) we are aware of testing in the U.S. which we are advised resulted in a preliminary finding that skimming was not practicable. (d) No. Identity Fraud (Question No. 514) Senator Ludwig asked the Minister for Justice and Customs, upon notice, on 11 April 2005: With reference to the 39-year old factory hand who was charged on 11 March 2005 with 15 counts of possession of forged Commonwealth documents by the Identity Crime Task Force (ICTF): (1) What was the nationality of the individual. (2) Did the fraudulent documents indicate they were to be used to assist people with the illegal move- ment of people or people smuggling operations; if so, can details be provided. (3) Have any arrests been made of employees of departments where documents were stolen; if so, how many people have been arrested or charged in assisting in the process of identity fraud from gov- ernment departments. (4) (a) In 2005 to date, how many arrests has the ICTF made for identity fraud; and (b) in how many of these arrests did the accused possess fraudulent forms of Commonwealth identification. (5) Has anyone been arrested for issuing 126 blank Australian Taxation Office (ATO) cheques. (6) Is this still an operational matter.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 199

(7) (a) How many ATO cheques were cashed by individuals fraudulently in the past 4 financial years; and (b) at what cost to the Commonwealth. (8) How many people have been successfully prosecuted for identity fraud in the past 4 financial years. (9) (a) Were the 14 false Medicare card numbers accepted into the Medicare system; and (b) were re- imbursement payments made to the general practitioner; if so, what was the total cost of this type of fraud for the past 4 years. Senator Ellison—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) He was originally from the People’s Republic of China, and is now an Australian citizen. (2) No. (3) No. (4) (a) Two. (b) Two. (5) The ATO cheques at this stage do not appear to have been issued by the ATO. The cheques appear to be forgeries. (6) Yes. (7) (a) This is a question more appropriately answered by the ATO. (b) Refer to (a). (8) The ICTF was formed in March 2003 and since this time there have been 24 arrests made by the ICTF which relate to identity crime. To date 13 of these persons have been convicted. The remain- ing persons are still before the Court. It should be noted State and Commonwealth law enforcement agencies investigate identity crime offences. The AFP does not maintain statistics on investigations by other agencies. As identity crimes are enablers to other crimes e.g. passport offences, fraud and narcotics offences, it is not possible to provide statistics on all matters involving identity crime. (9) (a) This is a matter more appropriately answered by the Health Insurance Commission (HIC). (b) Refer to (a). Rewards for Information (Question No. 515) Senator Ludwig asked the Minister for Justice and Customs, upon notice, on 11 April 2005: With reference to rewards offered for information: (1) What is the total amount that has been allocated for rewards leading to information on state or fed- eral cases. (2) How much has been claimed or paid out in the past 2 financial years. (3) Were successful prosecutions reached due to the information received; if so, can examples be pro- vided where this has occurred. (4) What happens to unclaimed rewards in the event that a case has been solved without reward com- pensation being sought. Senator Ellison—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) The Commonwealth Government may, from time to time, offer rewards through public notices, and these may be to assist in matters under investigation by the Australian Federal Police (AFP). The AFP itself, however, does not advertise rewards for assisting with investigations, allocate funding or pay for such rewards. The AFP may provide monetary payment to individuals registered as a human source, for assisting investigations. This only occurs when the person applies for such

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 200 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

payment, based on the results of their contributions to an investigation. There is no specific alloca- tion of funding for such payments. (2) The AFP is unable to answer this question in relation to rewards which have been offered by the Government. In relation to payments made to individuals, the AFP is unable to provide any details as payments are made on a strictly confidential basis, for the protection of those persons. (3) Many successful prosecutions have stemmed from investigations during which assistance was pro- vided by individuals registered as a human source. The AFP is unable to provide details, as to do so could jeopardise the safety of those persons. (4) The AFP cannot provide details about rewards offered by the Commonwealth Government. The AFP does not allocate funds for reward payments. Transport and Regional Services: Fraud (Question No. 516) Senator Ludwig asked the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 11 April 2005: In each of the financial years 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05 to date, how many cases of fraud against the department have been a result of forged documentation including any of the following: (a) forged drivers’ licences; (b) forged birth certificates; (c) forged Australian citizenship papers; (d) forged passports, either Australian or other nationalities (please specify); and (e) forged mar- riage certificates, either Australian or other nationalities (please specify). Senator Ian Campbell—The Minister for Transport and Regional Services has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: One case of fraud has been reported as a result of forged documentation against the Department in the period financial years 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05 to date. In 2001 a member of staff was found to have falsified a doctors certificate. Administrative action was taken on the staff member, and the funds concerned were recovered. Defence: Fraud (Question No. 518) Senator Ludwig asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 11 April 2005: In each of the financial years 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05 to date, how many cases of fraud against the department have been a result of forged documentation including any of the following: (a) forged deriver’s licences; (b) forged birth certificates; (c) forged Australian citizenship papers; (d) forged passports, either Australian or other nationalities (please specify); and (e) forged mar- riage certificates, either Australian or other nationalities (please specify). Senator Hill—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: The information sought in the honourable senator’s question is not readily available. Existing auto- mated systems would not enable Defence to determine the number of cases involving forged docu- ments. To collect and assemble such information solely for the purpose of answering the question would be a major task, and I am not prepared to authorise the expenditure and effort that would be re- quired Foreign Affairs and Trade: Fraud (Question No. 519) Senator Ludwig asked the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon no- tice, on 11 April 2005:

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 201

(1) In each of the financial years 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05 to date, how many cases of fraud against the department have been a result of forged documentation including any of the following: (a) forged drivers’ licences; (b) forged birth certificates; (c) forged Australian citi- zenship papers; (d) forged passports, either Australian or other nationalities (please specify); and (e) forged marriage certificates, either Australian or other nationalities (please specify). Senator Hill—The Minister for Foreign Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: CASES OF FORGED DOCUMENTATION DETECTED BY DFAT IN RELATION TO APPLICATIONS FOR AUSTRALIAN PASSPORTS 2001-02 TO 2004-05 (a) Forged (b) Forged (c) Forged (d) Forged (e) Forged drivers’ birth Australian passports (Aus- marriage licences certificates Citizenship tralian) certificates papers 2000-01 Nil 77 12 Nil Nil 2001-02 Nil 43 9 Nil Nil 2002-03 Nil 75 9 Nil Nil 2003-04 1 14 1 30 Nil 2004-05 (to date) 1 5 3 57 Nil

Education, Science and Training: Fraud (Question No. 523) Senator Ludwig asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education, Science and Training, upon notice, on 11 April 2005: In each of the financial years 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05 to date, how many cases of fraud against the department have been a result of forged documentation including any of the following: (a) forged drivers’ licences; (b) forged birth certificates; (c) forged Australian citizenship papers; (d) forged passports, either Australian or other nationalities (please specify); and (e) forged mar- riage certificates, either Australian or other nationalities (please specify). Senator Vanstone—The Minister for Education, Science and Training has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: In 2003-04 there was one case of fraud committed against DEST as a result of forged documentation. Family and Community Services: Fraud (Question No. 524) Senator Ludwig ask the Minister for Family and Community Services, upon notice, on 11 April 2005: In each of the financial years 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05 to date, how many cases of fraud against the department have been a result of forged documentation including any of the following: (a) forged drivers’ licences; (b) forged birth certificates; (c) forged Australian citizenship papers; (d) forged passports, either Australian or other nationalities (please specify); and (e) forged mar- riage certificates, either Australian or other nationalities (please specify). Senator Patterson—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: The following table shows the number of recorded cases of fraud against the Department of Family and Community Services (FaCS) as a result of forged documentation, including past and present portfolio agencies, for the financial years 2000/01 to 2004/05 inclusive.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 202 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

The present portfolio agencies are the Social Security Appeals Tribunal (SSAT) and the Australian Insti- tute of Family Studies (AIFS). Past portfolio agencies are the Child Support Agency (CSA), Centrelink and, the Commonwealth Rehabilitation Service (CRS) that ceased to be part of the FaCS portfolio in 2002/03. Centrelink is unable to provide figures, as the data is not recorded on electronic records. The informa- tion is recorded on the paper files of individual customers and it would not be a practical or realistic exercise to access and collate this data. Agency Financial Year 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 FaCS 0 0 0 0 0 SSAT 0 0 0 0 0 AIFS 0 0 0 0 0 CSA 1 4 3 2 1 CRS 0 0 - - -

Employment and Workplace Relations: Fraud (Question No. 526) Senator Ludwig asked the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Work- place Relations, upon notice, on 11 April 2005: In each of the financial years 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05 to date, how many cases of fraud against the department have been a result of forged documentation including any of the following: (a) forged drivers’ licences; (b) forged birth certificates; (c) forged Australian citizenship papers; (d) forged passports, either Australian or other nationalities (please specify); and (e) forged mar- riage certificates, either Australian or other nationalities (please specify). Senator Abetz—The Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: For the period July 2000 to date, there have been no cases of fraud against the department as a result of (a) forged drivers’ licences; (b) forged birth certificates; (c) forged Australian citizenship papers; (d) forged passports, either Australian or other nationalities; or (e) forged marriage certificates, either Aus- tralian or other nationalities. With respect to forged documentation generally, for the years 2000-01 and 2001-02, the department (and its relevant predecessor, the Department of Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Busi- ness) did not disaggregate the records of incidents of fraud from records of incidents of contractual non- compliance. Accordingly, it would be an unreasonable diversion of the department’s investigatory re- sources to recall and revisit files in order to provide figures in respect of the number of cases of fraud against the department as a result of forged documentation for the financial years 2000-01 and 2001-02. However, it has been practicable for the department to identify that in one case committed in 2000-01, charges of forge and utter (s67(b) Crimes Act 1914) were proven, but no conviction was recorded. One case of forgery was allegedly committed in 2002-03. The matter has been referred to the Com- monwealth Director of Public Prosecutions for consideration. No charges have been laid to date. Seven cases of forgery were allegedly committed in 2003-04. These matters are still being investigated by the department and, if substantiated, the matters will be referred, as appropriate, to the Common- wealth Director of Public Prosecutions. To date, four cases of forgery have allegedly been committed in 2004-05. Three of these matters are still being investigated by the department, with no charges laid to date. A charge of forgery (s144.1(1) Criminal Code Act 1995) was laid in the remaining case and a conviction was subsequently recorded.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 203

National Breeding and Development Centre (Question No. 528) Senator Ludwig asked the Minister for Justice and Customs, upon notice, on 11 April 2005: With reference to the Australian Customs Service (Customs) National Breeding and Development Cen- tre and the fact that since the September 11 attacks, 61 detection dogs bred and trained by Customs in Canberra have been sent to the United States of America to boost their airport security and another 20 have been sent into the Asian region: (1) What income has been received for the breeding and training of these dogs. (2) Does this income go into general Customs revenue or is it specifically channelled back into the breeding and training program. (3) (a) How many Customs staff are involved with this program; and (b) what are their work level classifications. (4) Does the National Breeding and Development Centre train counterparts from other nations in de- veloping similar programs. (5) Do these dogs check through outgoing luggage as well as incoming luggage at international air- ports. (6) When does the Minister expect to have enough dogs to prevent possible intrastate smuggling of illegal substances. Senator Ellison—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) The only income received from the supply of dogs to overseas agencies was US$12,000 for the sale of four trained Customs bred detector dogs to Saipan Customs. Additionally, one untrained adult female dog (chemical detection) was provided to Auburn Univer- sity in the United States at no cost, in return for training four Customs chemical detection dogs (at no cost). (2) The income derived from the sale to Saipan Customs has been returned to Australian Customs but has not been specifically channelled back to the breeding and training program. (3) (a) Four Customs officers are involved in the National Breeding and Development Centre (NBDC) program in Melbourne. (b) The Centre is staffed by one Customs Level 4, one Customs Level 2 and two Customs level 1 officers. NBDC also contracts two full-time kennel hands. (4) Yes, Customs assists the Department of Homeland Security and Auburn University in the United States of America, Saipan Customs and China Customs. (5) Customs dogs do not ‘routinely’ screen outgoing luggage but do perform this function if opera- tional requirements necessitate. (6) While Customs NBDC breeding production plans/infrastructure are geared primarily for Customs needs, Customs will continue to assist both overseas and domestic law enforcement agencies whenever possible. Approximately 200 Customs bred canines have been gifted/sold to local do- mestic law enforcement agencies in the past 7 years. Transport and Regional Services: Overseas Travel (Question No. 529) Senator O’Brien asked the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 12 April 2005:

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 204 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

For each of the financial years 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05 to date, how many trips were taken by officers of the Minister’s department and agencies to Christmas Island and/or the Cocos (Keeling) Is- lands, including on how many occasions: (a) officers travelled to the islands through Denpasar, Indone- sia; (b) officers travelled from the islands through Denpasar; and (c) the transit through Denpasar con- sisted of a stopover of: (i) one night, or (ii) more than one night. Senator Ian Campbell—The Minister for Transport and Regional Services has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: Based on information from the Department of Transport and Regional Services travel provider, the fol- lowing trips have been made to the Indian Ocean Territories by Departmental staff; 38 in 2002-03, 49 in 2003-04, and 43 so far in 2004-05. From the information provided no trips have included travel through Denpasar. Health and Ageing: Overseas Travel (Question No. 530) Senator O’Brien asked the Minister representing the Minister for Health and Ageing, upon notice, on 12 April 2005: For each of the financial years 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05 to date, how many trips were taken by officers of the Minister’s department and agencies to Christmas Island and/or the Cocos (Keeling) Is- lands, including on how many occasions: (a) officers travelled to the islands through Denpasar, Indone- sia; (b) officers travelled from the islands through Denpasar; and (c) the transit through Denpasar con- sisted of a stopover of: (i) one night, or (ii) more than one night. Senator Patterson—The Minister for Health and Ageing has provided the following an- swer to the honourable senator’s question: (a) (b) (c) (i) and (ii) During the financial years 2002-03, 2003-04, and 2004-05 to date, there were no trips taken by officers of the Department of Health and Ageing to Christmas Island or the Cocos (Keel- ing) Islands. Finance and Administration: Overseas Travel (Question No. 531) Senator O’Brien asked the Minister for Finance and Administration, upon notice, on 12 April 2005: For each of the financial years 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05 to date, how many trips were taken by officers of the Minister’s department and agencies to Christmas Island and/or the Cocos (Keeling) Is- lands, including on how many occasions: (a) officers travelled to the islands through Denpasar, Indone- sia; (b) officers travelled from the islands through Denpasar; and (c) the transit through Denpasar con- sisted of a stopover of: (i) one night, or (ii) more than one night. Senator Minchin—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: In 2002-03, two officers travelled to Christmas Island twice. No officers travelled to the Cocos (Keel- ing) Islands: (a) Neither officer who travelled to Christmas Island transited through Denpasar, Indonesia. (b) Not applicable. (c) Not applicable. In 2003-04, two officers travelled to Christmas Island once and one officer travelled twice. One officer also visited the Cocos (Keeling) Islands. (a) No officers transited through Denpasar, Indonesia.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 205

(b) Not applicable. (c) Not applicable. In 2004-05, two officers travelled to Christmas Island once and one officer travelled twice. No officers travelled to Cocos (Keeling) Islands. (a) One officer travelled on one occasion through Denpasar. Another officer travelled on two occa- sions through Denpasar. (b) No officers returned from Christmas Island through Denpasar, Indonesia. (c) (i) Two. (ii) None. Education, Science and Training: Overseas Travel (Question No. 533) Senator O’Brien asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education, Science and Training, upon notice, on 12 April 2005: For each of the financial years 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05 to date, how many trips were taken by officers of the Minister’s department and agencies to Christmas Island and/or the Cocos (Keeling) Is- lands, including on how many occasions: (a) officers travelled to the islands through Denpasar, Indone- sia; (b) officers travelled from the islands through Denpasar; and (c) the transit through Denpasar con- sisted of a stopover of: (i) one night, or (ii) more than one night. Senator Vanstone—The Minister for Education, Science and Training has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (a) Two (2) officers from the National Science and Technology Centre (Questacon) travelled to the Christmas Island and Cocos (Keeling) Islands between 10 and 20 June 2003. (b) The forward and return journey to the Islands was via Perth. (c) No other officers from the Department of Education, Science and Training and its portfolio agen- cies travelled to Christmas Island and/or the Cocos (Keeling) Islands or through Denpasar, Indone- sia during the financial years 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05. Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme (Question No. 537) Senator Crossin asked the Minister for Finance and Administration, upon notice, on 12 April 2005: With reference to access to benefits by members of the Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme (CSS) following a change in employment conditions: (1) Did ComSuper recently conduct a review of the requirements of the legislation governing the CSS and its relationship with the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 in the context of the sale of a Commonwealth agency; if so: (a) when was the review conducted; (b) what was the Commonwealth agency (or agencies) concerned; and (c) why was the review conducted. (2) If a review was conducted: (a) what were its terms of reference; (b) who conducted the review; (c) who was consulted during the review; (d) what was the outcome of the review; (e) was a copy of the review provided to the CSS Board or the Minister; and (f) can a copy be provided of the out- come of the review. (3) Were current CSS members informed that a review was being conducted; if not, why not; if so: (a) how were members informed about the review; and (b) can a copy be provided of any information sent to CSS members about the review. Senator Minchin—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows:

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 206 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

(1) No formal review has been undertaken. Consideration of the CSS Boards obligations under the Superannuation Act 1976 (the Super Act) and the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (the SIS Act) was initiated after a request in April 2004 for information was made by a member concerned about superannuation entitlements in circumstances where a Commonwealth agency may be sold. (2) Following the above member inquiry, an analysis was undertaken of the relevant law in relation to the payment of particular CSS benefits. The outcome of that analysis was that in particular circum- stances, that is where a member remains employed by the employer that contributed to their CSS super, the CSS Board is unable to make benefit payments available to members. Certain payments to CSS members had been made previously in error. (3) Relevant information has been published on the CSS website, and will be followed up in the rele- vant annual member statements. The website material is as follows: “CEO provides clarification on benefit payments for CSS members employed by approved authori- ties” I am posting this notice to advise members that a benefit payment arrangement, previously made available to a number of CSS members employed by approved authorities, is in breach of superan- nuation law and therefore will no longer be available. This is contrary to the advice that some members may have received previously. We have personally contacted all members, of whom we are aware, that might be about to claim a benefit based on the arrangement that we now know is incorrect. The relevant payment arrangement was one that was made available to CSS members employed by approved authorities that offer the choice of an alternative super (superannuation) fund, such as: - Australian National University - Northern Territory Government - Telstra - University of Canberra CSS members in this situation are able to change super funds, thereby stopping their CSS contribu- tory membership and deferring (or preserving) their CSS benefit. In the past, some members have then claimed their deferred benefit at the minimum retirement age (generally 55) although they continued to work for the same employer who contributed to their CSS super. On discovering this arrangement, the CSS Board immediately sought independent legal advice. This advice confirmed that a CSS retirement benefit cannot be paid if a member remains in con- tinuous employment with the same employer who contributed to their CSS super. As a result, the CSS Board is unable, by law, to make any future benefit payments of this type. A CSS retirement benefit can only be paid if a CSS member reaches retirement age and meets con- ditions of release such as: - ceasing employment completely (i.e. total retirement); or - leaving the employer who contributed to their CSS superannuation (further conditions apply which vary according to the member’s age and type of exit). An error with members’ benefit payments is unacceptable, and we deeply regret that it has been made. Any affected members are welcome to meet with me and Leo Bator (the Commissioner for Superannuation) to discuss the matter further – you can send me an email direct using the button below. You may also choose to seek independent professional advice.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 207

This issue is very complex and, as a matter of priority, the CSS Board and its administrator Com- Super have established processes to ensure a situation such as this does not happen again. Already, we have updated all relevant information on our website and have contacted those mem- bers we know have been affected. I will keep members informed of any further results. Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme (Question No. 538) Senator Crossin asked the Minister for Finance and Administration, upon notice, on 12 April 2005: With reference to a review by ComSuper of relevant legislation governing the Commonwealth Super- annuation Scheme (CSS) in the context of access to benefits by CSS members following a change in employment conditions: (1) What were the findings of the review in relation to the payment of cash benefits and the effect of section 111A of the Superannuation Act 1976. (2) Did the review find that a cash benefit is not payable in these circumstances unless a condition of release specified in item 108 of Schedule 1 of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Regula- tions 1994 is met. (3) Since the review, have the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Regulations been amended with respect to conditions of release; if so, can details be provided of, and an explanation for, any changes. (4) Since the review, has there been any change to the way in which ComSuper has applied the regula- tions in these circumstances; if so, what is the change and why has it occurred. (5) Who has the discretion in determining when to pay benefits and what is the process if a member believes that this discretion has been used inappropriately. (6) Were members of the CSS notified of the changes to the way in which these regulations were to be applied; if so, how; if not, why not. Senator Minchin—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) See response to Q 537. (2) See response to Q 537. (3) Unrelated to the CSS benefit payments and SIS conditions of release issue, the Minister for Reve- nue and Assistant Treasurer has introduced regulations under the SIS Act to assist people in transi- tioning to retirement. These regulations will commence on 1 July 2005 and will provide for a new limited condition of release for benefits held in a superannuation fund. The application of these amendments to the CSS and PSS is currently under consideration. (4) See response to Q 537. (5) The Superannuation Act 1976 and the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 govern the payment of benefits. If a member believes that an inappropriate decision has been made they may lodge a complaint through the CSS complaints procedure which can include internal and external review. (6) See response to Q 537. Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme (Question No. 539) Senator Crossin asked the Minister for Finance and Administration, upon notice, on 12 April 2005:

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 208 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

With reference to information sent to members of the Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme (CSS): Is it correct that members’ statements issued for the period I July 2003 to 30 June 2004, under the sec- tion ‘your options’ included a new and additional statement inserted in bold type that read in part ‘you can claim your deferred benefit once you reach your minimum retiring age (generally 55) and are no longer employed by the same employer who contributed to your CSS super’; if so: (a) why was this change made; and (b) who decided that this additional information would be added to the members’ statements. Senator Minchin—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) Yes (a) This change was made to ensure that members were aware of the permissible circumstances under which they could claim their benefits. (b) The CSS Board. Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme (Question No. 540) Senator Crossin asked the Minister for Finance and Administration, upon notice, on 12 April 2005: With reference to a current review regarding access to Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme (CSS) benefits: (1) (a) Is a review of the CSS regarding the access to the CSS benefit following a change in employ- ment circumstances being undertaken; and (b) does this also involve a review of the way in which the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 and regulations are applied. (2) With reference to the review process: (a) who is involved and who is conducting this review; (b) what are the terms of reference or the objective of the review; (c) what is the timeframe for this re- view and will a draft report be made available for comment; (d) is a report of the review due to be provided to the CSS Board or the Minister or both; (e) who is being consulted during this review; and (f) will current members of the CSS and those affected by the review be given an opportunity to comment; if so, how; if not, why not. Senator Minchin—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) and (2) An investigation of an individual’s circumstances for the payment of certain Common- wealth Superannuation Scheme (CSS) benefits is being progressed by my Department in consulta- tion with the CSS Board Executive, ComSuper (the Scheme administrator) and other relevant stakeholders such as the industry regulators. When the investigation is concluded, the CSS Board and myself will be advised of the outcomes. Taxation (Question No. 541) Senator Sherry asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 13 April 2005: Is it correct that in the case of an employee who receives financial compensation for a period of wrong- ful termination that extends over more than one financial year, provision can be made under the Income Tax Assessment Act for the lump sum payment to be split between the financial years for income tax payment purposes yet the same lump sum that includes a superannuation contribution to a superannua- tion fund is assessed as a single payment for surcharge/tax purposes. Senator Minchin—The Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 209

With respect to income tax liability, a taxpayer who receives eligible income in a lump sum payment in respect of earlier years of income may be entitled to a tax offset. Eligible income includes back pay- ment of salary or wages paid to a person in respect of a period of suspension. To be eligible for the tax offset, the amount of the lump sum which accrued before the year of receipt must not be less than 10 per cent of the normal taxable income of the year of receipt. In respect of the superannuation surcharge, the Government announced in the 2005-06 Budget that it will abolish the surcharge payable on surchargeable contributions and termination payments received from 1 July 2005. Consequently, the treatment of lump sum payments received from that date for sur- charge purposes is irrelevant. Education, Science and Training: Payment of Accounts (Question No. 544) Senator Sherry asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education, Science and Training, upon notice, on 13 April 2005: (1) What is the normal period of payment of accounts from suppliers of goods and services to the de- partment. (2) How many suppliers have not been paid within the period for payment, and in each case, what was the reason for late payment. Senator Vanstone—The Minister for Education, Science and Training has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) The normal period of payment of accounts from suppliers of goods and services to the Department is 30 days. (2) (a) An analysis was undertaken of six (6) months of financial data from the Department’s SAPfi- hre financial management system for the period 1 October 2004 to 31 March 2005. (b) The total number of transactions for this period was 11,868. (c) Of the total number of transactions, 524 (4.4%) of the transactions were identified as falling outside the 30 day payment period. (d) A random sample of the 524 transactions was investigated by Departmental Officers and re- vealed that late payments fell into the following 4 (four) categories: Reason for late payment Number of suppliers not paid within 30 days Communication errors resulting from the Department’s proce- 175 (1.5%) dures not being fully carried out, staff absences and invoices sent to the wrong area in the Department. Vendor issues resulting in invoices being sent before the goods 94 (0.8%) were received, vendors not suppling bank account details, incom- plete invoices, duplicate invoices received and cancelled invoices. Postal issues resulting in delays in mail delivery from remote lo- 15 (0.1% calities. Other delays resulting from incorrect completion of forms and 240 (2.0%) electronic entry, new staff in processing areas, or when an invoice is overlooked.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 210 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone (Question No. 545) Senator Allison asked the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon no- tice, on 19 April 2005: (1) Is it the case that the Government does not intend to manufacture, test or possess nuclear weapons; if so, why is it that the Government will not sign the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty. (2) Is it the case the Government has rejected the Mexican Government’s invitation to attend the forth- coming conference of the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone; if so, why. (3) Does the Government consider that support from the United States of America for the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone to be essential for Australia to join; if so, why. Senator Hill—The Minister for Foreign Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) Australia signed the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty (SPNFZ) in 1985 and ratified it in 1986. Australia took a leading role in establishing SPNFZ and remains fully committed to it. (2) The forthcoming conference to be hosted by Mexico is on nuclear weapon free zones generally, not SPNFZ alone. Australia will not be attending because of concerns about the draft conference dec- laration including a lack of balance in the references to nuclear disarmament. Australia was also concerned that the NPT nuclear weapon states were not invited to participate, except as observers, and were not consulted on the draft conference declaration. The Government considers nuclear weapon free zone (NWFZ) issues are best taken forward through non-nuclear weapon states engag- ing constructively with the nuclear weapon states. Nuclear weapon states make an important con- tribution to NWFZs through adherence to the protocols to the zones which are a vehicle for the weapon states to give binding assurances not to use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against NWFZ parties. (3) See (1) National Gallery of Australia (Question No. 547) Senator Carr asked the Minister for the Arts and Sport, upon notice, on 19 April 2005: (1) Can the Minister confirm that the terms of reference for Mr Robert Wray’s investigation into can- cer deaths at the National Gallery of Australia (NGA), have been broadened [where ‘terms of refer- ence’ also includes ‘directions to investigate’ or any other form of words that has the same mean- ing]. (2) What are the revised terms of reference. (3) Can the Minister confirm that these now include authority to investigate why the management of the NGA and Comcare failed to provide him with existing details of cancer cases and other ill- nesses at the time of his earlier investigation. (4) Under whose auspices was Mr Wray’s recent report addressing issues relating to cancer deaths and other health issues conducted; was it the NGA or Comcare. (5) Does the NGA have the authority to release this report as claimed by Comcare; if not, who has that authority. (6) Under the revised terms of reference for Mr Wray’s investigation, what arrangements have been made to ensure that he can establish whether additional, and as yet unidentified material pertinent to his inquiries exists.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 211

(7) What arrangements have been made to ensure that Mr Wray can have full access to NGA files and records to enable him to undertake the most effective inquiry possible. Senator Kemp—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) to (4) and (6) The NGA has advised that the appointment of Mr Wray and the terms of reference relating to his investigation were determined by Comcare. It is appropriate that questions relating to the investigation process be directed to Comcare. (5) The investigation and report were commissioned by Comcare. The NGA has advised that it has the discretion to release the report, taking into account advice from Comcare relating to privacy princi- ples and the provisions of the Privacy Act 1988. (7) The NGA has assured me that it is cooperating fully with the investigation. Iraq (Question No. 548) Senator Allison asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 19 April 2005: (1) Can the Minister confirm that Saddam Hussein’s effigy was pulled down again in Baghdad’s Firdos Square in April 2005 together with effigies of the President of the United States of America (US), George W Bush, and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Mr Tony Blair. (2) How many Iraqi Shias were at that protest. (3) Is it the case that at this protest, Sunni and Shia Nationalists affirmed ‘the legitimate right of the Iraqi resistance to defend their country and its destiny’ while ‘rejecting terrorism aimed at innocent Iraqis, institutions, public buildings and places of worship’, as quoted in the Guardian report of 13 April 2005. (4) What information is available on the involvement of the Association of Muslim Scholars, the Na- tional Foundation Congress and the Iraqi armed resistance. (5) Does the Minister agree with the following statement contained in the Guardian report: ‘For most Iraqis, with the exception of the Kurds, Washington’s “liberation” never was. Wounded national pride was greater than relief at Saddam’s departure. Iraqis were soon angered by the failure to get power and water supplies repaired, the brutality of US army tactics, and the disappearance of their country’s precious oil revenues into inadequately supervised accounts, or handed to foreigners un- der contracts that produced no benefits for Iraqis’. (6) How many Iraqis are currently held in detention without trial, the so-called ‘security detainees’. (7) What is the most recent advice from the US on a reduction in the number of its troops in Iraq. (8) Is it the case that the US will have permanent bases in Iraq. (9) Is it the case as reported in the Guardian that the joint Sadr-National Foundation Congress main- tains the Iraqi Government ‘will have no right to ratify any agreement or treaty that might affect Iraq’s sovereignty, the unity of its territory and the preservation of its resources’. Senator Hill—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) No. (2) Coalition sources provided an estimate in a classified briefing, which was less than the ‘tens of thousands’ mentioned on Al Jazeera. Open sources, including Al Jazeera, have reported various figures that cannot be verified by Defence. (3) Yes. (4) Other than the issuing of the joint statement with Sadr, Defence is unaware of any further involve- ment by the National Foundation Congress.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 212 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Press reporting indicates the Association of Muslim Scholars (AMS) urged Iraqi Sunnis to attend the 9 April demonstrations. Sheikh Harith al Dari, Secretary General of the AMS, called for the 9 April demonstration to be a peaceful march, and after the event, praised and congratulated those (including AMS members) who protested against the ‘tragic aggression against the Iraqi people over the past two years’. Although it is unclear whether any of the participants in the demonstration were directly involved with the Iraqi armed resistance, there were no insurgent attacks on the, ultimately, peaceful demon- stration. (5) No. (6) Defence has no knowledge of numbers of Iraqis held in detention without trial. (7) There is no fixed schedule for the drawdown of Coalition forces in Iraq. (8) This is a matter between the US and the Iraqi Governments. (9) Defence has no knowledge of an organisation named the Sadr National Foundation Congress. The organisation referred to may be the Iraqi National Foundation Congress (INFC). According to open source reporting, the comment was made by a spokesperson for the INFC. Defence has no means of verifying the legitimacy of this reporting. Iraq (Question No. 549) Senator Allison asked the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon no- tice, on 19 April 2005: (1) Can the Minister confirm that Saddam Hussein’s effigy was pulled down again in Baghdad’s Firdos Square in April 2005 together with effigies of the President of the United States of America (US), George W Bush, and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Mr Tony Blair. (2) How many Iraqi Shias were at that protest. (3) Is it the case that at this protest, Sunni and Shia Nationalists affirmed ‘the legitimate right of the Iraqi resistance to defend their country and its destiny’ while ‘rejecting terrorism aimed at innocent Iraqis, institutions, public buildings and places of worship’, as quoted in the Guardian report of 13 April 2005. (4) What information is available on the involvement of the Association of Muslim Scholars, the Na- tional Foundation Congress and the Iraqi armed resistance. (5) Does the Minister agree with the following statement contained in the Guardian report: ‘For most Iraqis, with the exception of the Kurds, Washington’s “liberation” never was. Wounded national pride was greater than relief at Saddam’s departure. Iraqis were soon angered by the failure to get power and water supplies repaired, the brutality of US army tactics, and the disappearance of their country’s precious oil revenues into inadequately supervised accounts, or handed to foreigners un- der contracts that produced no benefits for Iraqis’. (6) How many Iraqis are currently held in detention without trial, the so-called ‘security detainees’. (7) What is the most recent advice from the US on a reduction in the number of its troops in Iraq. (8) Is it the case that the US will have permanent bases in Iraq. (9) Is it the case as reported in the Guardian that the joint Sadr-National Foundation Congress main- tains the Iraqi Government ‘will have no right to ratify any agreement or treaty that might affect Iraq’s sovereignty, the unity of its territory and the preservation of its resources’. Senator Hill—The Minister for Foreign Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 213

(1) Embassy staff were not present at the site and we cannot confirm what may have transpired. (2) Embassy staff were not present. The information is publicly available from other sources. (3) See answer (1). (4) See answer (1). We cannot advise on which groups may or may not have attended. (5) No. (6) Australia does not maintain data on persons detained under the authority of UN security Council Resolution 1546, and does not itself hold any persons under that authority. (7) US Government officials have publicly indicated troop numbers will fall commensurate with the ability of the Iraqi Security Forces to manager security tasks. (8) That is a decision for the Iraqi Government and the US Government. (9) No. Military Flyovers (Question No. 553) Senator Mark Bishop asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 20 April 2005: With reference to the media release of the Member for Parkes, Mr John Cobb, MP, dated 6 August 2004 regarding the provision of two Iroquois Huey helicopters at Broken Hill for a flyover on 18 August 2004: (1) On what date was the Minister first approached by Mr Cobb to provide the helicopters. (2) In each of the past 3 years, has the Minister received other representations: if so; (a) from whom and when; (b) what was the total cost of providing the helicopters; and (c) from which budget were the funds drawn to meet the cost of the helicopters. (3) For each of the past 3 financial years and 2004-2005 to date: (a) from which community groups has the Minister received requests to provide helicopters, other aircraft, military equipment or person- nel for commemorative purposes; (b) when were the representations made; (c) what was the nature of the request; (d) what was the Minister’s response to each of these representations; and (e) what was the projected and actual cost of each request. (4) For each of the past 3 financial years and 2004-2005 to date: (a) from which members of the Fed- eral Parliament has the Minister received requests to provide helicopters, other aircraft, military equipment or personnel for commemorative purposes; (b) when were the representations made; (c) what was the nature of the request; (d) what was the Minister’s response to each of these represen- tations; and (e) what was the projected and actual cost of each request. Senator Hill—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) 12 May 2004. (2) Yes. (a) Mr T Redwood, Manager Asset Manager Toowoomba City Council, 28 September 2004. (b) An Iroquois helicopter and a Kiowa helicopter were provided for the event. The cost for the Kiowa helicopter to conduct the activity was $1,818. The cost for the Iroquois was $4,780. (c) The funds for the event were drawn from the 2004/2005 budget. (3) and (4) The information sought in the honourable senator’s question is not readily available. To provide a complete response would require considerable time and resources and, in the interest of efficient utilisation of departmental resources, I am not prepared to authorise the expenditure of re- sources and effort to provide the information requested. Defence receives numerous requests, both from community groups and through ministerial correspondence, for participation in commemora-

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 214 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

tive events. Each request is considered on a case-by-case basis and is approved in accordance with the Defence Assistance to the Civil Community - policy and procedures. C-130J Aircraft (Question No. 558) Senator Mark Bishop asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 21 April 2005: With reference to page 197 of the Department of Defence Annual Report 2003-04 would the Minister advise: (1) The cost of the project undertaken to develop an innovative and cost-effective solution to correct propeller balance in the C-130J. (2) Was this project required as a result of a manufacturing fault, or was it required due to normal wear and tear; if due to a manufacturing fault, what action has been taken to recoup costs from the manufacturer. (3) For each of the next five financial years, what is the projected annual saving expected as a result of this solution to correct propeller balance in the C-130J. (4) Has the Commonwealth attempted to sell this solution to correct propeller balance in the C-130J to allied nations who also use the C-130J; if not, why not, and if so: (a) which nations have been ap- proached and when; (b) which nations have accepted and when; and (c) what has been the revenue earned to date by the Commonwealth from this solution to correct propeller balance in the C-130J. (5) For each of the next five financial years what is the projected revenue to be earned by the Com- monwealth from this solution to correct propeller balance in the C-130J. Senator Hill—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) Direct cost is forecast at AUD $60,000. (2) There is no relevant manufacturing fault with the aircraft. C-130J propellers are required to be balanced every 60 weeks to ensure the engine does not operate outside prescribed vibration limits. (3) Projected annual manpower savings are estimated at 276 man-hours per year ($8,452) or 1380 man-hours ($42,260) over five years. In addition to the reduced wear on engines because of better balanced propellers, ground engine running time will also be reduced, combining to resulting in in- creased engine life. The exact value of these savings is still to be determined but expected to sig- nificantly out-weigh the minor project cost. (4) No. Australia is a member of the C130J Joint User Group (JUG) which is a collaborative program between allied nations who are users of the C-130J. Each user shares its activities and problems, in an attempt to maximise efficiency, reduce the common workload between users and reduce the cost of ownership. (5) No cash revenue will be forthcoming from this agreement. Red-Tailed Black Cockatoo Habitat (Question No. 559) Senator Brown asked the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, upon notice, on 22 April 2005: With reference to the Red-Tailed Black Cockatoo: (1) What measures are being implemented to prevent further destruction of the habitat of the Red- Tailed Black Cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus banksii graptogyne), particularly Bulokes (Allocasuarina leuhmannii) the bird’s major nesting and seed feed species.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 215

(2) As this bird is listed under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 as endangered, can the Minister explain how the Government is ameliorating further decline in this species. (3) Can the Minister confirm that private clearing of significant areas of Buloke habitat is taking place in Victoria. (4) What consultations has the Government had with the Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment which is approving applications to clear individual and communities of Buloke trees. Senator Ian Campbell—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) Proposals to clear Buloke Trees that are likely to have a significant impact on the Red-tailed Black Cockatoo will require consideration under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conserva- tion Act 1999 (EPBC Act). The Department of the Environment and Heritage is developing guide- lines to assist landholders in deciding whether activities potentially affecting habitat of the Red- tailed Black Cockatoo are sustainable or require referral under the EPBC Act. (2) The Government, through the Natural Heritage Trust, has funded the development of a recovery plan for the Red-tailed Black Cockatoo. Significant Natural Heritage Trust funding has also been provided for actions aimed at recovery of the Cockatoo. (3) No. (4) See answer to (1). The recovery plan, guidelines and other Natural Heritage Trust measures are being actioned in consultation with the Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment, as appropriate. Political Activity (Question No. 560) Senator Brown asked the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, upon notice, on 26 April 2005: With reference to the Minister’s recent letter to certain environment organisations as reported on page 5 of the Sydney Morning Herald on 12 April 2005: (1) Does the Minister’s definition of ‘political activity’ include: (a) lobbying political parties; (b) advocating that political parties adopt more environmentally-responsible policies; and (c) holding forums where politicians and/or candidates are invited to speak. (2) What action aimed at promoting environmental protection does the Minister consider not to be ‘political activity’. (3) Will the Minister provide the advice received from the Australian Taxation Office or the Minister for Revenue and Assistant Treasurer (on which the letter to the environment organisations is based), stating that environmental groups’ tax deductible funds cannot be used for political activity. (4) What Commonwealth law provides that such funds cannot be used for political activity. Senator Ian Campbell—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) No. (2) The activities listed in part 1 of the question and any other advocacy or activity not directly related to overt party political election campaigning. (3) Refer to (4). (4) Section 30-265 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 requires that all organisations listed on the Register of Environmental Organisations maintain a public fund and that all gifts made to the fund must only be used for the principal purpose of the organisation. Section 30-265 provides that the principal purpose must be the protection and enhancement of the natural environment or of a sig-

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 216 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

nificant aspect of the natural environment; or the provision of information or education, or the car- rying on of research, about the natural environment or a significant aspect of the natural environ- ment. Southern Supporter (Question No. 565 Amended) Senator Chris Evans asked the Minister for Forestry and Conservation, upon notice, on 19 August 2002: (3) Can the following details be provided in relation to the Southern Supporter for each of the 2000-01 and 2001-02 financial years: (b) how many were suspected of illegally fishing in Australian waters; Senator Ian Macdonald—Part of the answer to the honourable senator’s question was provided incorrectly on 11 November 2002 as follows: (3) (b) During an extended hot pursuit of the Lena by the Southern Supporter, two vessels, the Flor- ence and the Volga, assisted the Lena by firstly broadcasting bogus Emergency Position Indicating Rescue Beacon (EPIRB) signals in an attempt to get the Southern Supporter to break off its hot pursuit. The Florence also re-fuelled the Lena. Whilst there had not been any recorded observa- tions of the Florence or the Volga fishing in the Australian fishing zone (AFZ) around HIMI at that time, both vessels were strongly suspected of involvement in IUU fishing. The correct answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (3) (b) During an extended hot pursuit of the Lena by the Southern Supporter, two foreign fishing ves- sels, the Florence and the Champion, assisted the Lena by firstly broadcasting bogus Emergency Position Indicating Rescue Beacon (EPIRB) signals in an attempt to get the Southern Supporter to break off its hot pursuit. The Florence also re-fuelled the Lena. Whilst there had not been any re- corded observations of the Florence or the Champion fishing in the Australian fishing zone (AFZ) around HIMI at that time, both vessels were strongly suspected of involvement in IUU fishing. Non-Proliferation Treaty (Question No. 578) Senator Allison asked the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon no- tice, on 3 May 2005: (1) Can a summary be provided of the results of the public consultation meetings held in Sydney, Mel- bourne, Adelaide and Perth in the lead-up to the Review of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty in May 2005. (2) (a) How many people attended the meetings; and (b) from which organisations. (3) Why were these public meetings not advertised. (4) What methods were used to publicise the meetings. Senator Hill—The Minister for Foreign Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) Yes (2) DFAT domestic outreach meetings were held during March and April 2005 in Canberra, Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth. Approximately 30 to 50 people attended each meeting. Organisa- tions represented included the Australian Institute of International Affairs (AIIA), the Parliamen- tary Network for Nuclear Disarmament, the Medical Association for the Prevention of War, the Australian Conservation Foundation, Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 217

(3) The meetings were advertised by relevant AIIA branches in conjunction with DFAT regional of- fices, Adelaide University and the University of Western Australia. They were also widely publi- cised through NGO networks. (4) See (3) Commonwealth State Disability Agreement (Question No. 580) Senator Allison asked the Minister for Family and Community Services, upon notice, on 3 May 2005: (1) When will the Commonwealth State Disability Agreement (CSDA) be reviewed. (2) Which of the recommendations made by the 1995 review of the CSDA have been implemented and which have not, and if not, why not. (3) What is the status of negotiations with each of the state and territory governments on the additional respite for carers over 70 years of age. Senator Patterson—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) The Commonwealth State Territory Disability Agreement extends until 30 June 2007. There are no plans to formally review the Agreement during that period. (2) The 1995 review of the first Commonwealth State Disability Agreement contained 50 recommendations. These were all taken into account and considered by the Australian and State and Territory jurisdictions in renegotiating and implementing the third Agreement, which com- menced in July 2002. (3) The Australian Government initiative, announced in the 2004-05 Budget, to provide access to res- pite for older carers was conditional on matching funding from state and territory governments. Currently agreement has been reached with two jurisdictions. Agreement has been reached at offi- cials’ level with three other jurisdictions. To date, two jurisdictions have not accepted the Austra- lian Government’s offer of matched funding. Treasurer: Responsibilities (Question No. 774) Senator Chris Evans asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 4 May 2005: (1) For each of the financial years from 2000-01 to 2004-05 to date, what boards, councils, committees and advisory bodies fall within the responsibilities of the Minister. (2) For each body referred to in paragraph (1): (a) who are the members; (b) when were they ap- pointed; (c) how were they appointed and what mechanism was used in the selection process; (d) how long is their term and when does their term expire; (e) what fees, allowances and other bene- fits are enjoyed by the members; have these fees, allowances and other benefits varied since 2000; if so, what was the reason for each variation, and what was the quantum of each variation. (3) For each of the financial years from 2000-01 to 2004-05 to date, can details be provided of the members’ publicly-funded travel. (4) (a) When have these appointees/boards provided formal reports to the Minister; and (b) can a copy of these reports be provided; if not, why not. Senator Minchin—The Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 218 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

(1) The following boards, councils, committees and advisory bodies currently fall within the responsi- bilities of the Treasurer: Australian Statistics Advisory Council Australian Accounting Standards Board Auditing and Assurance Standards Board Board of Taxation Business Regulation Advisory Group Companies, Auditors and Liquidators Disciplinary Board Commonwealth Consumer Affairs Advisory Council Corporations and Markets Advisory Committee (CAMAC, formerly Companies and Securities Advisory Committee) Electronic Commerce Expert Group Financial Reporting Council Financial Reporting Panel Financial Sector Advisory Council Foreign Investment Review Board Health Services Advisory Committee Legal Sub-Committee of CAMAC Life Insurance Actuarial Standards Board National Competition Council Payments System Board Reserve Bank of Australia Board Shareholders and Investors Advisory Council Prior to 2004, the following bodies also fell within the Treasurer’s responsibilities. Financial Sector Advisory Council Task Force General Insurance Advisory Panel Axiss Australia Advisory Board Some of the responsibilities for some of the bodies listed above have been delegated to the Minister for Revenue and Assistant Treasurer or the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer. (2) The response to this part of the question is provided in the attached table. In the case of statutory bodies, appointments are made in accordance with the provisions of the relevant legislation. In some cases, processes for appointments are also covered by the Cabinet Handbook and the Executive Council Handbook, both of which are public documents. For exam- ple, in the case of significant Government appointments, the Cabinet Handbook requires that “min- isters must write to the Prime Minister seeking his or, at his discretion, Cabinet’s approval of the appointment.” In regard to fees and allowances, in most cases these are set by the Remuneration Tribunal and the information is publicly available. In the small number of cases where the fees and allowances are not set by the Remuneration Tribunal, they are generally set with reference to comparable positions determined by the Remuneration Tribunal and variations are made in line with variations to Remu- neration Tribunal determinations.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 219

(3) The response to part (2) of the question provides general information on the travel entitlements provided to the members listed. The very detailed information sought in this part of the honourable Senator’s question is not readily available in consolidated form and it would be a major task to col- lect and assemble it. The practice of successive governments has been not to authorise the expendi- ture of time and money involved in assembling such information on a general basis. (4) Where the bodies listed above are required by law to provide annual reports to the Government and/or Parliament, this is indicated in the attached table. Information is also provided in the table on other public documents.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 220 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Name of Board, Council, Full-time/ Position Held First Term Term Appointed Fees, Travel Formal Other Public Committee Part-time Appointed Com- Expires By Allowances, Entitle- Reports Documents menced Benefits ment Provided and When; Copy Provided Y/N? If not, why? WARBURTON, Mr Rich- PT Chairman 2000 14 Sep 00 14 Jan 08 Treasurer $666/day Tier 1 Reports to See Website ard Treasurer JORDAN, Mr Chris PT Deputy Chairman 2000 14 Sep 00 14 Jan 08 Treasurer $503/day Tier 1 HEADING, Mr Brett PT Member 2000 14 Sep 00 14 Jan 08 Treasurer $503/day Tier 1 SCHWAGER, Ms Jane PT Member 2002 16 Oct 02 14 Jan 07 Treasurer $503/day Tier 1 JAMES, Mr Keith PT Member 2004 1 Mar 04 28 Feb 06 Treasurer $503/day Tier 1 MAYNE, Mr Eric PT Member 2005 15 Jan 05 14 Jan 07 Treasurer $503/day Tier 1 RENDALL, Mr Curt PT Member 2005 15 Jan 05 14 Jan 07 Treasurer $503/day Tier 1 CARMODY, Mr Michael PT Ex-officio member 2000 14 Sep 00 HENRY, Dr Ken PT Ex-officio member 2001 27 Apr 01 QUIGGIN, Mr Peter PT Ex-officio member 2004 19 Jan 04

WALTER, Mrs Catherine Chair 1997 no fixed Nil Nil No No term GILBERT, Mr Richard Member 2002 no fixed Nil Nil term HAMILTON, Ms Karen Member 2002 no fixed Nil Nil term WOOD, Ms Karen Member 2002 no fixed Nil Nil term STONE, Ms Phillippa Member 2002 no fixed Nil Nil term

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 221

Name of Board, Council, Full-time/ Position Held First Term Term Appointed Fees, Travel Formal Other Public Committee Part-time Appointed Com- Expires By Allowances, Entitle- Reports Documents menced Benefits ment Provided and When; Copy Provided Y/N? If not, why? SEGAL, Ms Jillian Member 2003 no fixed Nil Nil term POTTER, Mr Michael Member 2002 no fixed Nil Nil term CROSSING, Mr Peter Member 2002 no fixed Nil Nil term McCAHEY, Ms Jan Member 2002 no fixed Nil Nil term McFARLANE, Mr John Member 2002 no fixed Nil Nil term ** BRAG is an informal group that was established in mid 1997 to provide feedback from peak industry bodies on the Corporate Law Economic Reform Program. BRAG is a non-statutory body appointed for an indeterminate period.

MAGAREY, Mr Donald PT Chairman 1999 1 Jun 03 31 May 06 Treasurer Rem Tribunal Annual No Rees Report to Treasurer tabled in Parliament CASTLE, Mr David Frank PT Deputy Chairman 2003 1 Jun 03 31 May 06 Treasurer Rem Tribunal MORRIS, Mr Brian Tho- PT Member (CPAA) 1997 5 Sep 00 20 Oct 06 Nominated * Rem Tribunal mas OLIFENT, Mr David John PT Member (ICAA) 1991 21 Oct 03 20 Oct 06 Nominated * Rem Tribunal

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 222 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Name of Board, Council, Full-time/ Position Held First Term Term Appointed Fees, Travel Formal Other Public Committee Part-time Appointed Com- Expires By Allowances, Entitle- Reports Documents menced Benefits ment Provided and When; Copy Provided Y/N? If not, why? PONTING, Mr Patrick PT Member (CPAA) 2000 5 Sep 00 20 Oct 06 Nominated * Rem Tribunal Joseph BURROWS, Mr Patrick PT Member (ICAA) 2004 1 Sep 04 31 Aug 07 Nominated * Rem Tribunal BARNETT, Mr David PT Member (Business) 2004 1 Sep 04 31 Aug 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal BOSTOCK, Mr Tom PT Member (Business) 2004 1 Sep 04 31 Aug 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal KEEVES, Mr John PT Member (Business) 2004 1 Sep 04 31 Aug 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal RAMSAY, Mr Ian PT Member (Business) 2004 1 Sep 04 31 Aug 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal STORY, Mr John PT Member (Business) 2004 1 Sep 04 31 Aug 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal STRETTON, Mr Simon PT Member (Business) 2004 1 Sep 04 31 Aug 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal NEW MEMBER PT Member (CPAA) Nominated * Rem Tribunal NEW MEMBER PT Member (ICAA) Nominated * Rem Tribunal (Nominated * = the Minister selects the accounting members from a panel nomi- nated by each of the accounting bodies (ICAA & CPA Australia)

NEAVE, Mr Colin PT Chairman 1999 28 Feb 05 28 Feb 07 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 Formal Yes BARTELS, Mr Gregory PT Member 1999 28 Feb 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 reports are GUTHRIE, Ms Fiona PT Member 1999 28 Feb 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 provided to HARVEY, Ms Diana PT Member 2002 28 Feb 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 the Minister KAY, Mr Michael PT Member 1999 28 Feb 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 after each KNOWLES, Mr John PT Member 2002 28 Feb 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 meeting and TAYLOR, Ms Adriana PT Member 1999 28 Feb 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 at other times KELL, Mr Peter PT Member 2004 28 Feb 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 at the request MAURICE, Mr Daniel PT Member 2005 29 Apr 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 of the Minis-

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 223

Name of Board, Council, Full-time/ Position Held First Term Term Appointed Fees, Travel Formal Other Public Committee Part-time Appointed Com- Expires By Allowances, Entitle- Reports Documents menced Benefits ment Provided and When; Copy Provided Y/N? If not, why? WARNER, Mr David PT Member 2005 29 Apr 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 ter. The SNEDDON, Mr Mark PT Member 2005 29 Apr 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 availabilities FAIR, Mr Patrick PT Member 2005 29 Apr 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 of copies is generally at the discretion of the Chair and the Minister. LUCY, AM Mr Jeffrey PT Member - ex officio 2004 13 May 04 12 May 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal Reports as May publish ASIC required any advice it under the has given to CAC Act the Minister. BOROS, Prof Elizabeth PT Member 2002 11 Dec 02 10 Dec 05 Treasurer Rem Tribunal BRADSHAW, Ms Barbara PT Member 2002 11 Dec 02 10 Dec 05 Treasurer Rem Tribunal See Website RAMSAY, Prof Ian PT Member 2002 11 Dec 02 10 Dec 05 Treasurer Rem Tribunal ST JOHN, Mr Richard PT Convenor 1997 10 Mar 05 9 Mar 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal WITHNALL, Ms Nerolie PT Member 2001 10 Mar 05 9 Mar 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal SEIDLER, Mr Robert PT Member 2001 10 Mar 05 9 Mar 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal McBRIDE, Ms Louise PT Member 2001 10 Mar 05 9 Mar 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal MICALIZZI, Ms Marian PT Member 1999 10 Mar 05 9 Mar 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal VICKERY AM, Mr Greg PT Member 2005 23 May 05 22 May 08 Treasurer Rem Tribunal BAFILE, Ms Zelinda PT Member 2005 23 May 05 22 May 08 Treasurer Rem Tribunal

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 224 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Name of Board, Council, Full-time/ Position Held First Term Term Appointed Fees, Travel Formal Other Public Committee Part-time Appointed Com- Expires By Allowances, Entitle- Reports Documents menced Benefits ment Provided and When; Copy Provided Y/N? If not, why? McCLEARY, Ms Alice PT Member 2005 23 May 05 22 May 08 Treasurer Rem Tribunal BARRETT-LENNARD, Chairman 1999 1 Dec 02 PST - Minis- Ms Clare ter SNEDDON, Mr Mark Member 1999 1 Dec 02 PST - Minis- ter BESGROVE, Mr Keith Member 1999 1 Dec 02 PST - Minis- ter SYLVAN, Ms Louise Member 2002 1 Dec 02 PST - Minis- ter WARNER, Mr David Member 1999 1 Dec 02 PST - Minis- ter GEASON, Mr Paul Member 2002 1 Dec 02 PST - Minis- ter MAURICE, Mr Daniel Member 2003 1 Dec 02 PST - Minis- ter LEWIS, Mr Geoff Member 2002 1 Dec 02 PST - Minis- ter PETRIE, Mr Daniel Member 2002 1 Dec 02 PST - Minis- ter REES, Mr Martin Member 2002 1 Dec 02 PST - Minis- ter ** On 29 April 2005, the Minister wrote to members of the Expert Group on Electronic Commerce advising them that he had merged their responsibilities with CCAAC.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 225

Name of Board, Council, Full-time/ Position Held First Term Term Appointed Fees, Travel Formal Other Public Committee Part-time Appointed Com- Expires By Allowances, Entitle- Reports Documents menced Benefits ment Provided and When; Copy Provided Y/N? If not, why? MACEK, Mr Charles PT Chairman 2000 11 Jun 03 10 Jun 06 Treasurer $70,000 Tier 1 Annual See Website Report to Treasurer tabled in Parliament ALEXANDER AM, Ms PT Deputy Chairman 2000 7 Mar 03 6 Sep 06 Treasurer $666/day Tier 1 Elizabeth Anne sitting fee, unless in fulltime Common- wealth em- ployment CHALLEN, Mr Donald PT Member 2000 7 Mar 03 6 Sep 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 William HUMPHRY, Mr Richard PT Member 2005 7 Mar 05 6 Mar 08 Treasurer As above Tier 1 HUNT, Mr Warwick PT Member 2005 9 Feb 05 8 Feb 08 Treasurer As above Tier 1 JACKSON, Mr David John PT Member 2000 7 Mar 03 6 Sep 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 McGREGOR AO, Mr PT Member 2000 7 Mar 03 6 Sep 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 Graeme William MURPHY, Mr James (Jim) PT Member 2003 7 Mar 03 6 Mar 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 Andrew POCKETT, Mr Thomas PT Member 2003 7 Mar 03 6 Mar 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 William

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 226 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Name of Board, Council, Full-time/ Position Held First Term Term Appointed Fees, Travel Formal Other Public Committee Part-time Appointed Com- Expires By Allowances, Entitle- Reports Documents menced Benefits ment Provided and When; Copy Provided Y/N? If not, why? POUND, Mr Gregory PT Member 2003 7 Mar 03 6 Mar 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 David PRIOR, Mr Phillip PT Member 2001 13 Sep 04 12 Sep 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 SCULLIN, Mr Brian Edwin PT Member 2003 11 Jun 03 10 Jun 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 WALTER AM, Ms Cath- PT Member 2003 7 Mar 03 6 Mar 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 erine Mary WEST, Ms Jan PT Member 2005 7 Mar 05 6 Mar 08 Treasurer As above Tier 1 ZIMMERMAN, Mr Klaus PT Member 2003 7 Mar 03 6 Mar 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 COTTON, Mr Roger Craig Alternative Member 2003 7 Mar 03 6 Mar 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 HARRISON AO, Mr Alternative Member 2003 7 Mar 03 6 Mar 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 Stephen Barry Morgan RAWSTRON, Mr Michael Alternative Member 2003 7 Mar 03 6 Mar 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 The Financial Reporting Panel (FRP) is a new alternative dispute resolution body established on 1 January 2005 under the Corporate Law Economic Reform Program (Audit Reform and Corporate Disclosure) Act 2004. The FRP will resolve disputes between ASIC and companies concerning the application of accounting standards and the true and fair view requirement in the Corporations law. The FRP is expected to commence operations as soon as possible in the second half of 2005. The appointments of a Chairperson and members are currently being progressed.

NEWMAN AC AM, Mr FT Chairman 1998 22 Aug 02 22 Aug 06 Treasurer Nil Tier 2 Council No Maurice Lionel provides papers to Treasurer CURRAN AO, Mr Charles FT Member 2002 22 Aug 02 22 Aug 06 Treasurer Nil Tier 2

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 227

Name of Board, Council, Full-time/ Position Held First Term Term Appointed Fees, Travel Formal Other Public Committee Part-time Appointed Com- Expires By Allowances, Entitle- Reports Documents menced Benefits ment Provided and When; Copy Provided Y/N? If not, why? FITZPATRICK, Mr Barry FT Member 2004 6 Dec 04 6 Dec 06 Treasurer Nil Tier 2 Francis HAWKER, Mr Michael FT Member 2004 6 Dec 04 6 Dec 06 Treasurer Nil Tier 2 John MACKAY, Mr Chris John FT Member 2002 22 Aug 02 22 Aug 06 Treasurer Nil Tier 2 MURRAY, Mr David FT Member 1999 9 Nov 03 9 Nov 05 Treasurer Nil Tier 2 Victor NICHOLLS, Ms Linda FT Member 2004 6 Dec 04 6 Dec 06 Treasurer Nil Tier 2 Bardo OWEN, Mr (Les) Arthur FT Member 2003 9 Nov 03 9 Nov 05 Treasurer Nil Tier 2 Leslie SHEPPARD, Mr Richard FT Member 1998 22 Aug 02 22 Aug 06 Treasurer Nil Tier 2 Wallace

PHILLIPS, AO Mr Mervyn PT Chairman 1997 16 Apr 02 15 Apr 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal Annual No John report to Treasurer tabled in Parliament MILES, The Hon. Chris PT Member 1999 8 Jun 99 7 Jun 09 Treasurer Rem Tribunal WOOD, Ms Lynn PT Member 1995 3 Apr 05 2 Apr 10 Treasurer Rem Tribunal

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 228 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Name of Board, Council, Full-time/ Position Held First Term Term Appointed Fees, Travel Formal Other Public Committee Part-time Appointed Com- Expires By Allowances, Entitle- Reports Documents menced Benefits ment Provided and When; Copy Provided Y/N? If not, why? WOOLDRIDGE, Dr Mi- PT Chair 2005 7 Mar 05 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $610/day @ Tier 2 Chair reports Discretion of chael mtgs; $53 TA to Treasurer Treasurer daily; $98 TA o/night MARTIN, Mr John Edwin PT Member 2003 15 Dec 03 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $460/day @ Tier 3 Charles mtgs; $53 TA daily; $98 TA o/night MACKEY, Dr Ken PT Member 2003 5 Sep 03 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $460/day @ Tier 3 mtgs; $53 TA daily; $98 TA o/night FIELD, Mr Chris PT Member 2003 5 Sep 03 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $460/day @ Tier 3 mtgs; $53 TA daily; $98 TA o/night FITZPATRICK, Ms Lesley PT Member 2003 5 Sep 03 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $460/day @ Tier 3 mtgs; $53 TA daily; $98 TA o/night

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 229

Name of Board, Council, Full-time/ Position Held First Term Term Appointed Fees, Travel Formal Other Public Committee Part-time Appointed Com- Expires By Allowances, Entitle- Reports Documents menced Benefits ment Provided and When; Copy Provided Y/N? If not, why? WRONSKI, Prof Ian PT Member 2003 5 Sep 03 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $460/day @ Tier 3 mtgs; $53 TA daily; $98 TA o/night LIMBURY, Mr Alan PT Member 2003 5 Sep 03 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $460/day @ Tier 3 mtgs; $53 TA daily; $98 TA o/night WALTERS, Dr Robert PT Member 2003 3 Nov 03 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $460/day @ Tier 3 mtgs; $53 TA daily; $98 TA o/night CHILD, Dr Andrew PT Member 2004 7 Dec 04 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $460/day @ Tier 3 mtgs; $53 TA daily; $98 TA o/night MASON, Dr Robyn PT Member 2004 7 Dec 04 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $460/day @ Tier 3 mtgs; $53 TA daily; $98 TA o/night

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 230 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Name of Board, Council, Full-time/ Position Held First Term Term Appointed Fees, Travel Formal Other Public Committee Part-time Appointed Com- Expires By Allowances, Entitle- Reports Documents menced Benefits ment Provided and When; Copy Provided Y/N? If not, why? MITCHELL, Dr Chris PT Member 2005 7 Mar 05 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $460/day @ Tier 3 mtgs; $53 TA daily; $98 TA o/night CORCORAN, Prof Suz- PT Member 2001 19 Jun 02 18 Jun 05 Minister Rem Tribunal Provides No anne advice to main Advi- sory Com- mittee BLACK, Mr Ashley PT Member 2002 11 Dec 02 10 Dec 05 Minister Rem Tribunal MACLEAN, Mr Duncan PT Member 2002 11 Dec 02 10 Dec 05 Minister Rem Tribunal Wilson HEADING, Mr James Brett PT Member 1993 8 Mar 04 7 Mar 06 Minister Rem Tribunal LANDELS, Mr Francis PT Member 1997 8 Mar 04 7 Mar 06 Minister Rem Tribunal Guy David SHERVINGTON, Mr PT Member 1993 8 Mar 04 7 Mar 06 Minister Rem Tribunal Laurence James WATTS, Mr Gary Francis PT Member 1993 8 Mar 04 7 Mar 06 Minister Rem Tribunal EGAN, Mr Damian Francis PT Member 1997 8 Mar 04 7 Mar 06 Minister Rem Tribunal WITHNALL, Ms Nerolie PT Convenor 1994 10 Mar 05 9 Mar 07 Minister Rem Tribunal BOROS, Prof Elizabeth PT Member 2001 10 Mar 05 9 Mar 07 Minister Rem Tribunal HILL, Prof Jennifer PT Member 1995 10 Mar 05 9 Mar 07 Minister Rem Tribunal STRETTON, Mr Simon PT Member 2005 10 Mar 05 9 Mar 08 Minister Rem Tribunal

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 231

Name of Board, Council, Full-time/ Position Held First Term Term Appointed Fees, Travel Formal Other Public Committee Part-time Appointed Com- Expires By Allowances, Entitle- Reports Documents menced Benefits ment Provided and When; Copy Provided Y/N? If not, why? ABRAMSON, Ms Julie PT Member 2005 10 Mar 05 9 Mar 08 Minister Rem Tribunal WHITELAW, Ms Eliza- PT Member 2005 23 May 05 22 May 08 Minister Rem Tribunal beth JENKINS, Mr Timothy C PT Chairman 1995 6 Jul 04 5 Jul 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal Board pro- Actuarial vides annual standards and report to newsletters APRA published on APRA web- site KARP, Mr Tom PT Government Member 1998 1 Jul 98 N/A Treasurer Rem Tribunal AARON, Mr Clive PT Member 1998 6 Jul 04 5 Jul 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal BARTLETT, Mr J William PT Member 1995 6 Jul 04 5 Jul 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal MARTIN, Mr Gregory C PT Member 2000 4 May 04 3 May 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal SLATER, Mr Graham W PT Member 2000 4 May 04 3 May 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal STEVENSON, Mr Carl J PT Member 2001 6 Jul 04 5 Jul 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal CRAWFORD, Mr David PT Acting Council 1999 26 Aug 04 25 Aug 05 Treasurer Minister ** Annual Assessment Ian President Report to reports pub- Treasurer lished on tabled in website Parliament CRAWFORD, Mr David PT Councillor 1999 18 Dec 03 17 Dec 06 Gov-General Rem Tribunal Ian McTAGGART, Dr Douglas PT Councillor 2000 18 Dec 03 17 Dec 06 Gov-General Rem Tribunal

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 232 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Name of Board, Council, Full-time/ Position Held First Term Term Appointed Fees, Travel Formal Other Public Committee Part-time Appointed Com- Expires By Allowances, Entitle- Reports Documents menced Benefits ment Provided and When; Copy Provided Y/N? If not, why? HICKEY, Ms Virginia Sue PT Councillor 2003 18 Dec 03 17 Dec 06 Gov-General Rem Tribunal SIMS, Mr Rodney Graham PT Councillor 2003 18 Dec 03 17 Dec 06 Gov-General Rem Tribunal **Fees, Allowances, Benefits for Acting President was set by Minister (Treasurer) under section 33A of the Acts Interpretation Act. Treasurer set Mr Crawford’s remuneration with some informal advice from the Rem Tribunal. Minister also set Mr Crawford’s conditions, including travel (Tier 1) in relevant Rem Tribunal Determination on Official Travel by Office Holders.

MACFARLANE, Mr Ian Chairman 1998 1 Jul 98 17 Sep 06 Treasurer - Rem Tribunal Annual No John ex officio report to Treasurer LOWE, Dr Philip Deputy Chairman 2004 8 Mar 04 RBA Rem Tribunal LAKER, Dr John APRA Member 1998 24 Jul 98 APRA Rem Tribunal GERSH, Mr Joseph Israel PT Member 1998 15 Jul 03 14 Jul 08 Treasurer Rem Tribunal McCARTHY, Ms Susan PT Member 1998 15 Jul 03 14 Jul 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal POYNTON, Mr John PT Member 2000 25 May 05 24 May 10 Treasurer Rem Tribunal THOM, Mr John PT Member 1998 15 Jul 03 14 Jul 06 Treasurer Rem Tribunal

MACFARLANE, Mr I J FT Chairman 1996 18 Sep 17 Sep 06 Treasurer Determined Reports as Publications (Governor) by a sub- required and research committee of under the published on non- CAC Act website executive Board mem- bers

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 233

Name of Board, Council, Full-time/ Position Held First Term Term Appointed Fees, Travel Formal Other Public Committee Part-time Appointed Com- Expires By Allowances, Entitle- Reports Documents menced Benefits ment Provided and When; Copy Provided Y/N? If not, why? STEVENS, Mr Glenn FT Deputy Chair 2001 21 Dec 20 Dec 08 Treasurer Determined (Depty Governor) by a sub- committee of non- executive Board mem- bers HENRY, Dr Ken (Treasury PT Member 2001 27 Apr N/A* Follows from Rem Tribunal Secretary) RBA Act BROADBENT, Ms Jillian PT Member 1998 7 May 6 May 08 Treasurer Rem Tribunal GERARD, Mr Robert PT Member 2003 20 Mar 19 Mar 08 Treasurer Rem Tribunal LOWY, Mr Frank PT Member 1995 27 Jun 9 Dec 05 Treasurer Rem Tribunal McGAUCHIE, Mr Donald PT Member 2001 30 Mar 29 Mar 06 Treasurer Rem Tribunal McKIBBIN, Prof Warwick PT Member 2001 31 Jul 30 Jul 06 Treasurer Rem Tribunal MORGAN, Mr Hugh PT Member 1996 14 Aug 28 Jul 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal In 2003-04 payments to exec & non-exec Board members totalled $1 221 946. In 2000-01 payments to exec & non-exec Board members totalled $1 022 388.

SHADFORTH, Mr Tony FT Member 2004 17 Jun 04 17 Jun 05 PST - Minis- Nil Tier 2 No No ter

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 234 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Name of Board, Council, Full-time/ Position Held First Term Term Appointed Fees, Travel Formal Other Public Committee Part-time Appointed Com- Expires By Allowances, Entitle- Reports Documents menced Benefits ment Provided and When; Copy Provided Y/N? If not, why? SMITH, Ms Amanda FT Member 2004 17 Jun 04 17 Jun 05 PST - Minis- Nil Tier 2 ter GUPPY, Mr Daryl FT Member 2004 17 Jun 04 17 Jun 05 PST - Minis- Nil Tier 2 ter READER HARRIS, Ms FT Member 2004 17 Jun 04 17 Jun 05 PST - Minis- Nil Tier 2 Penelope ter PADDICK, Mr Geoff FT Member 2004 17 Jun 04 17 Jun 05 PST - Minis- Nil Tier 2 ter HASTIE, Mr John FT Member 2004 17 Jun 04 17 Jun 05 PST - Minis- Nil Tier 2 ter DOIG, Ms Cynthia FT Member 2004 17 Jun 04 17 Jun 05 PST - Minis- Nil Tier 2 ter NICHOLSON, Ms Jill FT Member 2004 17 Jun 04 17 Jun 05 PST - Minis- Nil Tier 2 ter HUNTER, Mr Tony FT Member 2004 17 Jun 04 17 Jun 05 PST - Minis- Nil Tier 2 ter ROFE, Mr Ted FT Member 2004 17 Jun 04 17 Jun 05 PST - Minis- Nil Tier 2 ter

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 235

Minister for Revenue and Assistant Treasurer: Responsibilities (Question No. 794) Senator Chris Evans asked the Minister representing the Minister for Revenue and Assis- tant Treasurer, upon notice, on 4 May 2005: (1) For each of the financial years from 2000-01 to 2004-05 to date, what boards, councils, committees and advisory bodies fall within the responsibilities of the Minister. (2) For each body referred to in paragraph (1): (a) who are the members; (b) when were they ap- pointed; (c) how were they appointed and what mechanism was used in the selection process; (d) how long is their term and when does their term expire; (e) what fees, allowances and other bene- fits are enjoyed by the members; have these fees, allowances and other benefits varied since 2000; if so, what was the reason for each variation, and what was the quantum of each variation. (3) For each of the financial years from 2000-01 to 2004-05 to date, can details be provided of the members’ publicly-funded travel. (4) (a) When have these appointees/boards provided formal reports to the Minister; and (b) can a copy of these reports be provided; if not, why not. Senator Coonan—The Minister for Revenue and Assistant Treasurer has provided the an- swer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) The following boards, councils, committees and advisory bodies currently fall within the responsi- bilities of the Treasurer: Australian Statistics Advisory Council Australian Accounting Standards Board Auditing and Assurance Standards Board Board of Taxation Business Regulation Advisory Group Companies, Auditors and Liquidators Disciplinary Board Commonwealth Consumer Affairs Advisory Council Corporations and Markets Advisory Committee (CAMAC, formerly Companies and Securities Advisory Committee) Electronic Commerce Expert Group Financial Reporting Council Financial Reporting Panel Financial Sector Advisory Council Foreign Investment Review Board Health Services Advisory Committee Legal Sub-Committee of CAMAC Life Insurance Actuarial Standards Board National Competition Council Payments System Board Reserve Bank of Australia Board Shareholders and Investors Advisory Council Prior to 2004, the following bodies also fell within the Treasurer’s responsibilities.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 236 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Financial Sector Advisory Council Task Force General Insurance Advisory Panel Axiss Australia Advisory Board Some of the responsibilities for a number of the bodies listed above have been delegated to the Minister for Revenue and Assistant Treasurer or the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer. (2) The response to this part of the question is provided in the attached table. In the case of statutory bodies, appointments are made in accordance with the provisions of the relevant legislation. In some cases, processes for appointments are also covered by the Cabinet Handbook and the Executive Council Handbook, both of which are public documents. For exam- ple, in the case of significant Government appointments, the Cabinet Handbook requires that “min- isters must write to the Prime Minister seeking his or, at his discretion, Cabinet’s approval of the appointment.” In regard to fees and allowances, in most cases these are set by the Remuneration Tribunal and the information is publicly available. In the small number of cases where the fees and allowances are not set by the Remuneration Tribunal, they are generally set with reference to comparable positions determined by the Remuneration Tribunal and variations are made in line with variations to Remu- neration Tribunal determinations. (3) The response to part (2) of the question provides general information on the travel entitlements provided to the members listed. The very detailed information sought in this part of the honourable Senator’s question is not readily available in consolidated form and it would be a major task to col- lect and assemble it. The practice of successive governments has been not to authorise the expendi- ture of time and money involved in assembling such information on a general basis. (4) Where the bodies listed above are required by law to provide annual reports to the Government and/or Parliament, this is indicated in the attached table. Information is also provided in the table on other public documents.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 237

Name of Board, Council, Committee Full- Position Held First Term Term Expires Appointed Fees, Allow- Travel Formal Reports Other time/ Ap- Commenced By ances, Benefits Entitlement Provided and Public Part-time pointed When; Copy Docu- Provided Y/N? If ments not, why? WARBURTON, Mr Richard PT Chairman 2000 14 Sep 00 14 Jan 08 Treasurer $666/day Tier 1 Reports to Treas- See urer Website JORDAN, Mr Chris PT Deputy Chairman 2000 14 Sep 00 14 Jan 08 Treasurer $503/day Tier 1 HEADING, Mr Brett PT Member 2000 14 Sep 00 14 Jan 08 Treasurer $503/day Tier 1 SCHWAGER, Ms Jane PT Member 2002 16 Oct 02 14 Jan 07 Treasurer $503/day Tier 1 JAMES, Mr Keith PT Member 2004 1 Mar 04 28 Feb 06 Treasurer $503/day Tier 1 MAYNE, Mr Eric PT Member 2005 15 Jan 05 14 Jan 07 Treasurer $503/day Tier 1 RENDALL, Mr Curt PT Member 2005 15 Jan 05 14 Jan 07 Treasurer $503/day Tier 1 CARMODY, Mr Michael PT Ex-officio member 2000 14 Sep 00 HENRY, Dr Ken PT Ex-officio member 2001 27 Apr 01 QUIGGIN, Mr Peter PT Ex-officio member 2004 19 Jan 04

WALTER, Mrs Catherine Chair 1997 no fixed term Nil Nil No No GILBERT, Mr Richard Member 2002 no fixed term Nil Nil HAMILTON, Ms Karen Member 2002 no fixed term Nil Nil WOOD, Ms Karen Member 2002 no fixed term Nil Nil STONE, Ms Phillippa Member 2002 no fixed term Nil Nil SEGAL, Ms Jillian Member 2003 no fixed term Nil Nil POTTER, Mr Michael Member 2002 no fixed term Nil Nil CROSSING, Mr Peter Member 2002 no fixed term Nil Nil McCAHEY, Ms Jan Member 2002 no fixed term Nil Nil McFARLANE, Mr John Member 2002 no fixed term Nil Nil ** BRAG is an informal group that was established in mid 1997 to provide feedback from peak industry bodies on the Corporate Law Economic Reform Program. BRAG is a non-statutory body appointed for an indeterminate period.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 238 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Name of Board, Council, Committee Full- Position Held First Term Term Expires Appointed Fees, Allow- Travel Formal Reports Other time/ Ap- Commenced By ances, Benefits Entitlement Provided and Public Part-time pointed When; Copy Docu- Provided Y/N? If ments not, why? MAGAREY, Mr Donald Rees PT Chairman 1999 1 Jun 03 31 May 06 Treasurer Rem Tribunal Annual Report to No Treasurer tabled in Parliament CASTLE, Mr David Frank PT Deputy Chairman 2003 1 Jun 03 31 May 06 Treasurer Rem Tribunal MORRIS, Mr Brian Thomas PT Member (CPAA) 1997 5 Sep 00 20 Oct 06 Nominated * Rem Tribunal OLIFENT, Mr David John PT Member (ICAA) 1991 21 Oct 03 20 Oct 06 Nominated * Rem Tribunal PONTING, Mr Patrick Joseph PT Member (CPAA) 2000 5 Sep 00 20 Oct 06 Nominated * Rem Tribunal BURROWS, Mr Patrick PT Member (ICAA) 2004 1 Sep 04 31 Aug 07 Nominated * Rem Tribunal BARNETT, Mr David PT Member (Business) 2004 1 Sep 04 31 Aug 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal BOSTOCK, Mr Tom PT Member (Business) 2004 1 Sep 04 31 Aug 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal KEEVES, Mr John PT Member (Business) 2004 1 Sep 04 31 Aug 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal RAMSAY, Mr Ian PT Member (Business) 2004 1 Sep 04 31 Aug 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal STORY, Mr John PT Member (Business) 2004 1 Sep 04 31 Aug 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal STRETTON, Mr Simon PT Member (Business) 2004 1 Sep 04 31 Aug 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal NEW MEMBER PT Member (CPAA) Nominated * Rem Tribunal NEW MEMBER PT Member (ICAA) Nominated * Rem Tribunal (Nominated * = the Minister selects the accounting members from a panel nominated by each of the accounting bodies (ICAA & CPA Australia)

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 239

Name of Board, Council, Committee Full- Position Held First Term Term Expires Appointed Fees, Allow- Travel Formal Reports Other time/ Ap- Commenced By ances, Benefits Entitlement Provided and Public Part-time pointed When; Copy Docu- Provided Y/N? If ments not, why? NEAVE, Mr Colin PT Chairman 1999 28 Feb 05 28 Feb 07 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 Formal reports are Yes provided to the Minister after each meeting and at other times at the request of the Minister. The availabilities of copies is generally at the discretion of the Chair and the Minister. BARTELS, Mr Gregory PT Member 1999 28 Feb 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 GUTHRIE, Ms Fiona PT Member 1999 28 Feb 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 HARVEY, Ms Diana PT Member 2002 28 Feb 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 KAY, Mr Michael PT Member 1999 28 Feb 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 KNOWLES, Mr John PT Member 2002 28 Feb 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 TAYLOR, Ms Adriana PT Member 1999 28 Feb 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 KELL, Mr Peter PT Member 2004 28 Feb 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 MAURICE, Mr Daniel PT Member 2005 29 Apr 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 WARNER, Mr David PT Member 2005 29 Apr 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 SNEDDON, Mr Mark PT Member 2005 29 Apr 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3 FAIR, Mr Patrick PT Member 2005 29 Apr 05 28 Feb 06 PST-Minister Rem Tribunal Tier 3

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 240 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Name of Board, Council, Committee Full- Position Held First Term Term Expires Appointed Fees, Allow- Travel Formal Reports Other time/ Ap- Commenced By ances, Benefits Entitlement Provided and Public Part-time pointed When; Copy Docu- Provided Y/N? If ments not, why? LUCY, AM Mr Jeffrey PT Member - ex officio 2004 13 May 04 12 May 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal Reports as required May ASIC under the CAC Act publish any advice it has given to the Minister. BOROS, Prof Elizabeth PT Member 2002 11 Dec 02 10 Dec 05 Treasurer Rem Tribunal BRADSHAW, Ms Barbara PT Member 2002 11 Dec 02 10 Dec 05 Treasurer Rem Tribunal See Website RAMSAY, Prof Ian PT Member 2002 11 Dec 02 10 Dec 05 Treasurer Rem Tribunal ST JOHN, Mr Richard PT Convenor 1997 10 Mar 05 9 Mar 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal WITHNALL, Ms Nerolie PT Member 2001 10 Mar 05 9 Mar 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal SEIDLER, Mr Robert PT Member 2001 10 Mar 05 9 Mar 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal McBRIDE, Ms Louise PT Member 2001 10 Mar 05 9 Mar 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal MICALIZZI, Ms Marian PT Member 1999 10 Mar 05 9 Mar 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal VICKERY AM, Mr Greg PT Member 2005 23 May 05 22 May 08 Treasurer Rem Tribunal BAFILE, Ms Zelinda PT Member 2005 23 May 05 22 May 08 Treasurer Rem Tribunal McCLEARY, Ms Alice PT Member 2005 23 May 05 22 May 08 Treasurer Rem Tribunal

BARRETT-LENNARD, Ms Clare Chairman 1999 1 Dec 02 PST - Minis- ter SNEDDON, Mr Mark Member 1999 1 Dec 02 PST - Minis- ter

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 241

Name of Board, Council, Committee Full- Position Held First Term Term Expires Appointed Fees, Allow- Travel Formal Reports Other time/ Ap- Commenced By ances, Benefits Entitlement Provided and Public Part-time pointed When; Copy Docu- Provided Y/N? If ments not, why? BESGROVE, Mr Keith Member 1999 1 Dec 02 PST - Minis- ter SYLVAN, Ms Louise Member 2002 1 Dec 02 PST - Minis- ter WARNER, Mr David Member 1999 1 Dec 02 PST - Minis- ter GEASON, Mr Paul Member 2002 1 Dec 02 PST - Minis- ter MAURICE, Mr Daniel Member 2003 1 Dec 02 PST - Minis- ter LEWIS, Mr Geoff Member 2002 1 Dec 02 PST - Minis- ter PETRIE, Mr Daniel Member 2002 1 Dec 02 PST - Minis- ter REES, Mr Martin Member 2002 1 Dec 02 PST - Minis- ter

MACEK, Mr Charles PT Chairman 2000 11 Jun 03 10 Jun 06 Treasurer $70,000 Tier 1 Annual Report to See Treasurer tabled in Website Parliament ALEXANDER AM, Ms Elizabeth Anne PT Deputy Chairman 2000 7 Mar 03 6 Sep 06 Treasurer $666/day sitting Tier 1 fee, unless in fulltime Com- monwealth employment

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 242 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Name of Board, Council, Committee Full- Position Held First Term Term Expires Appointed Fees, Allow- Travel Formal Reports Other time/ Ap- Commenced By ances, Benefits Entitlement Provided and Public Part-time pointed When; Copy Docu- Provided Y/N? If ments not, why? CHALLEN, Mr Donald William PT Member 2000 7 Mar 03 6 Sep 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 HUMPHRY, Mr Richard PT Member 2005 7 Mar 05 6 Mar 08 Treasurer As above Tier 1 HUNT, Mr Warwick PT Member 2005 9 Feb 05 8 Feb 08 Treasurer As above Tier 1 JACKSON, Mr David John PT Member 2000 7 Mar 03 6 Sep 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 McGREGOR AO, Mr Graeme William PT Member 2000 7 Mar 03 6 Sep 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 MURPHY, Mr James (Jim) Andrew PT Member 2003 7 Mar 03 6 Mar 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 POCKETT, Mr Thomas William PT Member 2003 7 Mar 03 6 Mar 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 POUND, Mr Gregory David PT Member 2003 7 Mar 03 6 Mar 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 PRIOR, Mr Phillip PT Member 2001 13 Sep 04 12 Sep 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 SCULLIN, Mr Brian Edwin PT Member 2003 11 Jun 03 10 Jun 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 WALTER AM, Ms Catherine Mary PT Member 2003 7 Mar 03 6 Mar 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 WEST, Ms Jan PT Member 2005 7 Mar 05 6 Mar 08 Treasurer As above Tier 1 ZIMMERMAN, Mr Klaus PT Member 2003 7 Mar 03 6 Mar 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 COTTON, Mr Roger Craig Alternative Member 2003 7 Mar 03 6 Mar 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 HARRISON AO, Mr Stephen Barry Alternative Member 2003 7 Mar 03 6 Mar 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1 Morgan RAWSTRON, Mr Michael Alternative Member 2003 7 Mar 03 6 Mar 06 Treasurer As above Tier 1

The Financial Reporting Panel (FRP) is a new alternative dispute resolution body established on 1 January 2005 under the Corporate Law Economic Reform Program (Audit Reform and Corporate Disclosure) Act 2004. The FRP will resolve disputes between ASIC and companies concerning the application of accounting standards and the true and fair view requirement in the Corporations law. The FRP is expected to commence operations as soon as possible in the second half of 2005. The appointments of a Chairperson and members are currently being progressed. NEWMAN AC AM, Mr Maurice Lionel FT Chairman 1998 22 Aug 02 22 Aug 06 Treasurer Nil Tier 2 Council provide No s papers to Treas- urer CURRAN AO, Mr Charles FT Member 2002 22 Aug 02 22 Aug 06 Treasurer Nil Tier 2 FITZPATRICK, Mr Barry Francies FT Member 2004 6 Dec 04 6 Dec 06 Treasurer Nil Tier 2

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 243

Name of Board, Council, Committee Full- Position Held First Term Term Expires Appointed Fees, Allow- Travel Formal Reports Other time/ Ap- Commenced By ances, Benefits Entitlement Provided and Public Part-time pointed When; Copy Docu- Provided Y/N? If ments not, why? HAWKER, Mr Michael John FT Member 2004 6 Dec 04 6 Dec 06 Treasurer Nil Tier 2 MACKAY, Mr Chris John FT Member 2002 22 Aug 02 22 Aug 06 Treasurer Nil Tier 2 MURRAY, Mr David Victor FT Member 1999 9 Nov 03 9 Nov 05 Treasurer Nil Tier 2 NICHOLLS, Ms Linda Bardo FT Member 2004 6 Dec 04 6 Dec 06 Treasurer Nil Tier 2 OWEN, Mr (Les) Arthur Leslie FT Member 2003 9 Nov 03 9 Nov 05 Treasurer Nil Tier 2 SHEPPARD, Mr Richard Wallace FT Member 1998 22 Aug 02 22 Aug 06 Treasurer Nil Tier 2 PHILLIPS, AO Mr Mervyn John PT Chairman 1997 16 Apr 02 15 Apr 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal Annual report to No Treasurer tabled in Parliament MILES, The Hon. Chris PT Member 1999 8 Jun 99 7 Jun 09 Treasurer Rem Tribunal WOOD, Ms Lynn PT Member 1995 3 Apr 05 2 Apr 10 Treasurer Rem Tribunal WOOLDRIDGE, Dr Michael PT Chair 2005 7 Mar 05 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $610/day @ Tier 2 Chair reports to Discretion mtgs; $53 TA Treasurer of Treas- daily; $98 TA urer o/night MARTIN, Mr John Edwin Charles PT Member 2003 15 Dec 03 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $460/day @ Tier 3 mtgs; $53 TA daily; $98 TA o/night MACKEY, Dr Ken PT Member 2003 5 Sep 03 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $460/day @ Tier 3 mtgs; $53 TA daily; $98 TA o/night

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 244 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Name of Board, Council, Committee Full- Position Held First Term Term Expires Appointed Fees, Allow- Travel Formal Reports Other time/ Ap- Commenced By ances, Benefits Entitlement Provided and Public Part-time pointed When; Copy Docu- Provided Y/N? If ments not, why? FIELD, Mr Chris PT Member 2003 5 Sep 03 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $460/day @ Tier 3 mtgs; $53 TA daily; $98 TA o/night FITZPATRICK, Ms Lesley PT Member 2003 5 Sep 03 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $460/day @ Tier 3 mtgs; $53 TA daily; $98 TA o/night WRONSKI, Prof Ian PT Member 2003 5 Sep 03 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $460/day @ Tier 3 mtgs; $53 TA daily; $98 TA o/night LIMBURY, Mr Alan PT Member 2003 5 Sep 03 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $460/day @ Tier 3 mtgs; $53 TA daily; $98 TA o/night WALTERS, Dr Robert PT Member 2003 3 Nov 03 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $460/day @ Tier 3 mtgs; $53 TA daily; $98 TA o/night CHILD, Dr Andrew PT Member 2004 7 Dec 04 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $460/day @ Tier 3 mtgs; $53 TA daily; $98 TA o/night

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 245

Name of Board, Council, Committee Full- Position Held First Term Term Expires Appointed Fees, Allow- Travel Formal Reports Other time/ Ap- Commenced By ances, Benefits Entitlement Provided and Public Part-time pointed When; Copy Docu- Provided Y/N? If ments not, why? MASON, Dr Robyn PT Member 2004 7 Dec 04 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $460/day @ Tier 3 mtgs; $53 TA daily; $98 TA o/night MITCHELL, Dr Chris PT Member 2005 7 Mar 05 5 Sep 05 Treasurer $460/day @ Tier 3 mtgs; $53 TA daily; $98 TA o/night

CORCORAN, Prof Suzanne PT Member 2001 19 Jun 02 18 Jun 05 Minister Rem Tribunal Provides advice to No main Advisory Committee BLACK, Mr Ashley PT Member 2002 11 Dec 02 10 Dec 05 Minister Rem Tribunal MACLEAN, Mr Duncan Wilson PT Member 2002 11 Dec 02 10 Dec 05 Minister Rem Tribunal HEADING, Mr James Brett PT Member 1993 8 Mar 04 7 Mar 06 Minister Rem Tribunal LANDELS, Mr Francis Guy David PT Member 1997 8 Mar 04 7 Mar 06 Minister Rem Tribunal SHERVINGTON, Mr Laurence James PT Member 1993 8 Mar 04 7 Mar 06 Minister Rem Tribunal WATTS, Mr Gary Francis PT Member 1993 8 Mar 04 7 Mar 06 Minister Rem Tribunal EGAN, Mr Damian Francis PT Member 1997 8 Mar 04 7 Mar 06 Minister Rem Tribunal WITHNALL, Ms Nerolie PT Convenor 1994 10 Mar 05 9 Mar 07 Minister Rem Tribunal BOROS, Prof Elizabeth PT Member 2001 10 Mar 05 9 Mar 07 Minister Rem Tribunal HILL, Prof Jennifer PT Member 1995 10 Mar 05 9 Mar 07 Minister Rem Tribunal STRETTON, Mr Simon PT Member 2005 10 Mar 05 9 Mar 08 Minister Rem Tribunal ABRAMSON, Ms Julie PT Member 2005 10 Mar 05 9 Mar 08 Minister Rem Tribunal WHITELAW, Ms Elizabeth PT Member 2005 23 May 05 22 May 08 Minister Rem Tribunal

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 246 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Name of Board, Council, Committee Full- Position Held First Term Term Expires Appointed Fees, Allow- Travel Formal Reports Other time/ Ap- Commenced By ances, Benefits Entitlement Provided and Public Part-time pointed When; Copy Docu- Provided Y/N? If ments not, why? JENKINS, Mr Timothy C PT Chairman 1995 6 Jul 04 5 Jul 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal Board provides Actuarial annual report to standards APRA and newsletters published on APRA website KARP, Mr Tom PT Government Member 1998 1 Jul 98 N/A Treasurer Rem Tribunal AARON, Mr Clive PT Member 1998 6 Jul 04 5 Jul 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal BARTLETT, Mr J William PT Member 1995 6 Jul 04 5 Jul 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal MARTIN, Mr Gregory C PT Member 2000 4 May 04 3 May 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal SLATER, Mr Graham W PT Member 2000 4 May 04 3 May 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal STEVENSON, Mr Carl J PT Member 2001 6 Jul 04 5 Jul 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal

CRAWFORD, Mr David Ian PT Acting Council Presi- 1999 26 Aug 04 25 Aug 05 Treasurer Minister ** Annual Report to Assess- dent Treasurer tabled in ment Parliament reports published on website CRAWFORD, Mr David Ian PT Councillor 1999 18 Dec 03 17 Dec 06 Gov-General Rem Tribunal McTAGGART, Dr Douglas PT Councillor 2000 18 Dec 03 17 Dec 06 Gov-General Rem Tribunal HICKEY, Ms Virginia Sue PT Councillor 2003 18 Dec 03 17 Dec 06 Gov-General Rem Tribunal SIMS, Mr Rodney Graham PT Councillor 2003 18 Dec 03 17 Dec 06 Gov-General Rem Tribunal **Fees, Allowances, Benefits for Acting President was set by Minister (Treasurer) under section 33A of the Acts Interpretation Act. Treasurer set Mr Crawford’s remuneration with some informal advice from the Rem Tribunal. Minister also set Mr Crawford’s conditions, including travel (Tier 1) in relevant Rem Tribunal Determination on Official Travel by Office Holders.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 247

Name of Board, Council, Committee Full- Position Held First Term Term Expires Appointed Fees, Allow- Travel Formal Reports Other time/ Ap- Commenced By ances, Benefits Entitlement Provided and Public Part-time pointed When; Copy Docu- Provided Y/N? If ments not, why? MACFARLANE, Mr Ian John Chairman 1998 1 Jul 98 17 Sep 06 Treasurer - Rem Tribunal Annual report to No ex officio Treasurer LOWE, Dr Philip Deputy Chairman 2004 8 Mar 04 RBA Rem Tribunal LAKER, Dr John APRA Member 1998 24 Jul 98 APRA Rem Tribunal GERSH, Mr Joseph Israel PT Member 1998 15 Jul 03 14 Jul 08 Treasurer Rem Tribunal McCARTHY, Ms Susan PT Member 1998 15 Jul 03 14 Jul 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal POYNTON, Mr John PT Member 2000 25 May 05 24 May 10 Treasurer Rem Tribunal THOM, Mr John PT Member 1998 15 Jul 03 14 Jul 06 Treasurer Rem Tribunal MACFARLANE, Mr I J (Governor) FT Chairman 1996 18 Sep 17 Sep 06 Treasurer Determined by a sub-committee of Reports as required Publica- non-executive Board members under the CAC Act tions and research published on website STEVENS, Mr Glenn (Depty Governor) FT Deputy Chair 2001 21 Dec 20 Dec 08 Treasurer Determined by a sub-committee of non-executive Board members HENRY, Dr Ken (Treasury Secretary) PT Member 2001 27 Apr N/A* Follows from Rem Tribunal RBA Act BROADBENT, Ms Jillian PT Member 1998 7 May 6 May 08 Treasurer Rem Tribunal GERARD, Mr Robert PT Member 2003 20 Mar 19 Mar 08 Treasurer Rem Tribunal LOWY, Mr Frank PT Member 1995 27 Jun 9 Dec 05 Treasurer Rem Tribunal McGAUCHIE, Mr Donald PT Member 2001 30 Mar 29 Mar 06 Treasurer Rem Tribunal McKIBBIN, Prof Warwick PT Member 2001 31 Jul 30 Jul 06 Treasurer Rem Tribunal MORGAN, Mr Hugh PT Member 1996 14 Aug 28 Jul 07 Treasurer Rem Tribunal In 2003-04 payments to exec & non-exec Board members totalled $1 221 946. In 2000 01 payments to exec & non-exec Board members totalled $1 022 388.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 248 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Name of Board, Council, Committee Full- Position Held First Term Term Expires Appointed Fees, Allow- Travel Formal Reports Other time/ Ap- Commenced By ances, Benefits Entitlement Provided and Public Part-time pointed When; Copy Docu- Provided Y/N? If ments not, why? SHADFORTH, Mr Tony FT Member 2004 17 Jun 04 17 Jun 05 PST - Minis- Nil Tier 2 No No ter SMITH, Ms Amanda FT Member 2004 17 Jun 04 17 Jun 05 PST - Minis- Nil Tier 2 ter GUPPY, Mr Daryl FT Member 2004 17 Jun 04 17 Jun 05 PST - Minis- Nil Tier 2 ter READER HARRIS, Ms Penelope FT Member 2004 17 Jun 04 17 Jun 05 PST - Minis- Nil Tier 2 ter PADDICK, Mr Geoff FT Member 2004 17 Jun 04 17 Jun 05 PST - Minis- Nil Tier 2 ter HASTIE, Mr John FT Member 2004 17 Jun 04 17 Jun 05 PST - Minis- Nil Tier 2 ter DOIG, Ms Cynthia FT Member 2004 17 Jun 04 17 Jun 05 PST - Minis- Nil Tier 2 ter NICHOLSON, Ms Jill FT Member 2004 17 Jun 04 17 Jun 05 PST - Minis- Nil Tier 2 ter HUNTER, Mr Tony FT Member 2004 17 Jun 04 17 Jun 05 PST - Minis- Nil Tier 2 ter ROFE, Mr Ted FT Member 2004 17 Jun 04 17 Jun 05 PST - Minis- Nil Tier 2 ter

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 249

Environment Groups (Question No. 865) Senator Brown asked the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, upon notice, on 5 May 2005: With reference to the Minister’s comments about tax deductibility for environment groups made on ABC Radio National on 23 April 2005: Can a list be provided of the individuals and groups which have ‘complained’ about environment groups and their use of tax deductible status, including: (a) the name of the complainant; (b) the date of the complaint; and (c) a summary of the complaint. Senator Ian Campbell—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: Instances of possible abuse of environment groups’ tax-deductible status were raised by Senator Mason in a speech to the Senate on 1 March 2004 and by several Senators in the Senate Economics Legislation Committee Additional Estimates hearings on 17 February 2005, and are on the public record. Complaints have been received by me, my Office, and my Department on this issue. I am not prepared to breach the privacy of these individuals or groups by making their details known. Indonesian Military (Question No. 902) Senator Bartlett asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 11 May 2005: (1) (a) During the years 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05, have any Indonesian military personnel under- taken training at the Kokoda Barracks at Canungra (the location of the Australian Army Regional Training Centre); (b) how many Indonesian military personnel have trained there during each of those years; and (c) are there are any plans to train Indonesian military personnel at that location in the future. (2) Noting recent reports that the United States of America (US) is considering renewing military ties with Indonesia, has Australia received any indication from the US regarding a potential resumption of military ties between the US and Indonesia. (3) What are the current arrangements, if any, between the Australian and Indonesian military. (4) What joint training exercises, if any, have been undertaken involving Australian and Indonesian troops in the past 12 months, including: (a) the troops participating and whether these included Kopassus and TNI (Indonesian Army); (b) how many troops; (c) the location of the exercises; and (d) the nature of the exercises. (5) Does the Government maintain its commitment to ensure that no Indonesian officer who has previ- ously been involved in human rights violations will participate in any joint arrangement with Aus- tralian troops; if so, how does the Government propose to practically implement this policy. (6) Is the Government aware of a report by the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at the Australian National University, released on 4 November 2004, which found that Kopassus has not reformed its ways and recommended that Australia should not renew military ties with it; if so, what is the Government’s response to that report. Senator Hill—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) (a) Yes. (b) 2002-03 - 2 2003-04 - 5 2004-05 - 3 (c) Yes.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 250 SENATE Tuesday, 14 June 2005

(2) Any resumption of military ties between the United States and Indonesia is a matter between those two countries. (3) There is currently one Defence-sponsored formally agreed Administrative Arrangement in place between the Australian and Indonesian militaries. (4) No joint training exercises involving Australian and Indonesian troops have been conducted in the past 12 months. However, a combined maritime air surveillance exercise, Ex ALBATROS AUSINDO, was conducted with the Royal Australian Air Force and the Indonesian Air Force from 11 to 15 April 2005. (a) Personnel from the Royal Australian Air Force and the Indonesian Air Force were involved in Ex ALBATROS AUSINDO. The exercise did not involve Kopassus or Indonesian Army per- sonnel. (b) Approximately 34 air and ground crew from the Australian and Indonesian Air Forces. (c) Denpasar, Bali. (d) A combined air maritime surveillance exercise. (5) The Government excludes cooperation with all foreign military personnel who are known to have been involved in human rights abuses. The Government implements this policy based on the range of information sources available to it. (6) No. Fiji (Question No. 903) Senator Brown asked the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon no- tice, on 10 May 2005: With respect to the sentencing in Fiji of Australian national Mr Thomas Maxwell McCosker and Fiji local person Mr Dhirendra Nandan to 2 years gaol for engaging in homosexual sex: (1) What assistance has the Australian High Commission in Fiji given to ensure that Mr McCosker has access to legal representatives who can assist in the appeal against the sentence. (2) Has the Government made any request for clemency to the Fijian Government. (3) Has the Government expressed to the Fijian Government a view that such a sentence is a violation of Mr McCosker’s and Mr Nandan’s basic rights, as described by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. (4) Will the department issue suitable warnings to all Australian tourists visiting countries such as Fiji, advising them of the law in relation to homosexuals. Senator Hill—The Minister for Foreign Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) Mr McCosker was given a list of local lawyers during his initial consular visit at Natabua Prison, Lautoka on 6 April 2005. The list was also provided to Mr McCosker’s nominated next of kin in Australia who said he was willing to assist with the selection of a lawyer. (2) No. A request for clemency cannot be made until all legal avenues have been exhausted. (3) No. Fiji is not a signatory to the ICCPR and the Government believes representations about Mr McCosker’s and Mr Nandan’s human rights would be counter-productive while their legal proceed- ings are continuing.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Tuesday, 14 June 2005 SENATE 251

(4) All DFAT travel advisories remind Australians that when overseas they are subject to local laws, which can be very different from those in Australia. Following the enforcement of the law in rela- tion to homosexual acts against Mr McCosker, the Department updated its travel advice for Fiji on 15 April 2005 to advise Australian travellers that homosexual acts are illegal in Fiji.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE